Licensing Sub-Committee (Licensing Act 2003 Matters) - Wednesday 19 August 2026, 2:00pm

Licensing Sub-Committee (Licensing Act 2003 Matters)
Wednesday, 19th August 2026 at 2:00pm

Speaking:

Start of webcast

Share this agenda point

Seat 1
Seat 3
Seat 1
Seat 8
Seat 9
Seat 1
Seat 23
Seat 24
Seat 25
Seat 2
Seat 1
Seat 24
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 28
Seat 1
Seat 8
Seat 29
Seat 8
Seat 29
Seat 8
Seat 29
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 28
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 28
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 30
Seat 8
Seat 29
Seat 1
Seat 3
Seat 29
Seat 29
Seat 1
Seat 29
Seat 1
Seat 29
Seat 3
Seat 29
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 9
Seat 29
Seat 28
Seat 9
Seat 29
Seat 9
Seat 29
Seat 8
Seat 29
Seat 8
Seat 29
Seat 8
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 24
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 3
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 24
Seat 1
Seat 24
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 29
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 28
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 3
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 3
Seat 22
Seat 3
Seat 22
Seat 9
Seat 22
Seat 9
Seat 22
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 28
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 8
Seat 8
Seat 29
Seat 8
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 3
Seat 24
Seat 1
Seat 28
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 22
Seat 3
Seat 22
Seat 28
Seat 22
Seat 28
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 29
Seat 23
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 28
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 29
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 22
Seat 22
Seat 3
Seat 22
Seat 22
Seat 3
Seat 1
Seat 28
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 1
Seat 22
Seat 1
Seat 28
Seat 1
Seat 28
Seat 1
Seat 1
Webcast Finished

Select an agenda point

Scroll with video

Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.

Okay, we are on a roll.

Thank

Seat 1 - 0:00:14

you.

Thank you.

Thank you. attending today. This lighting committee hearing.

We don't expect any fire alarms. So if you do hear one, please follow it on office. It's fine. Quickest way out of the building. I also want to welcome people who may be watching online today. This.

hearing is being streamed live on the internet. I would remind members of the public, you

will be invited to speak at some point, but please don't disturb the proceedings as we

go along today. Everybody will get a chance. If I may ask, and I'm looking at the public

gallery now, how many people plan to speak today? Thank you. Thank you very much indeed.

It's a time management. We want to make sure that everybody does get the chance. So when

you do speak, I would ask all parties, please don't repeat what's already been said, but

if you've got something to contribute, you're very welcome to do so. I'm going to go now

to our first item on the agenda, and that is apologies. Nicky, do we have any apologies?

We don't have any apologies and we're quorum for this meeting.

Thank you very much.

Substitutions.

We've got any declaration of interest among members.

members. At this point, I would like to say that I am the GCC

county member for this area of the South Cotswolds. Part of my

duties are attending parish council meetings. I have

attended Long Newton Parish Council in the past. When I

went in before the meeting started, I advise that I sit on the planning committee, that

I won't take part in debates and I won't comment or be predetermined about any application

that's made in relation to the existence festival. Officers, any declarations of interest amongst

officers. Thank you very much. I would like now the members to introduce themselves. I'll start.

Seat 3 - 0:03:23

Seat 1 - 0:03:29

Hello Naomi Bloomer, ward member for St Michael's in Syrinsester. Thank you. Ian Watson, Teprytown.

Seat 8 - 0:03:36

Seat 9 - 0:03:41

Paul Evans I represent the Beaches Ward in Sire and Sester. And I'm Nick Bridges

Seat 1 - 0:03:46

representing Walthamore which is where you are. And now the officers please.

Seat 23 - 0:03:49

Seat 24 - 0:03:54

Nikki McKenzie -Dust I'm senior Democratic Services Officer. Kevin Dunford

Seat 25 - 0:03:59

Licencing Officer for Cotswold District. Emma Sparks Licencing Officer for Cotswold

District.

Seat 2 - 0:04:05

Leonie Woodward, the legal advisor to this committee

tonight.

Seat 1 - 0:04:12

Thank you very much indeed.

So what we go to now is the application.

and the application involved for the record is it's an application for a new premises licence.

It's in Teterbury East and rural and it is for the existence festival.

I would like to invite the officer now just to outline the case that we've got before us today.

Seat 24 - 0:04:58

Thank you, Chair. We have here a premises licence application that has been made by

Wild Dancing Limited for the existence festival at the land east of Baldridge Farm, Credwell

Lane, Longlearton. The activities applied for are contained within the reports. I can

refer to those if it's wished. Representations have been received for the application. Those

Those are contained within Annex C. There has been an update in relation to the representations.

We had two representations made from responsible authorities.

One from the noise pollution team and one from the water pollution team.

The conditions have been clarified and confirmed with the noise team.

They have subsequently withdrawn their representation.

The relevant cheques that were acquired by the water pollution team have been resolved

and the water team have contacted us today also withdrawing their representation confirming

that they are going to be bringing water to the sites by pillow bowsers.

There won't be any boreholes being used or any local water supply being used.

So the local water supply will not be disrupted.

As I said, they have subsequently withdrawn their representation.

So we have no representations in place now from responsible authorities.

The licencing authority will only apply terms to conditions and conditions to licences to promote one or more of the licencing objectives.

And that they are relevant to the individual circumstances of the application.

They include the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, prevention of public nuisance

and protection of children from harm.

The licencing authority will seek to ensure that the conditions are necessary, proportionate

and reasonable and will avoid the use of conditions which duplicate other legal requirements that

apply to an employer or an operator of the premises.

The licencing authority will consider every application on its individual merits and will

seek to balance the needs of the local community and commercial premises and activities against

those who may be concerned about the adverse impacts on the licenced premises.

The options for consideration by the subcommittee are to grant the application as requested,

to grant the application subject to such conditions that are necessary to promote the licencing

objectives, or to refuse the application in whole or in part where necessary to promote

the licencing objectives.

I'm nothing further to act yet.

Thank you very much indeed.

I'd like to invite members to ask questions of the officer

Seat 1 - 0:07:50

if you have any.

For clarity, Kevin, we say we won't

using the borehole what I know that area is served by a borehole the water will

be tanked in the applicant may be able to clarify the actual process of

brilliance in but yes the water is being supplied my understanding from the water

team Thames water providing the water I think it's being sourced from a location

in Swindon and the relevant paperwork and documents have been provided to the

water pollution team to clarify and confirm that.

And that the applicant may be able to provide more clarification.

Thanks. I'll pick that up later. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Kevin.

Seat 1 - 0:08:48

Moving on, I'd like to introduce the applicant.

If you could state your name and you can present your application as we go forward

and clarify any information arising from the office's outline.

After that, members will ask questions if they've got some.

So if you say your name and start your presentation, please.

Seat 28 - 0:09:22

My name is Rebecca Lowe, I am here with Daniel, the festival director for existence and Jason

who is representing the landowner of the site on which the event is proposed to take place.

Thank you for your time this afternoon, first of all, Councillors. There is a lot to get

through here, there is a lot of paperwork. I am sure you have been reading it in advance

of this committee and I don't know whether there was a fear there when you referred to

tonight that we might still be here tonight. I'm going to try and ensure that that isn't

the case. I'll try and be as brief as I can. But there is obviously a fair route to get

through. It will be my submission though, Councillors, that despite the volume of paperwork,

the volume of matters raised within the representations here, that this

application is actually rather more straightforward than it might appear

initially and that's for a number of reasons. The first reason for that

councillors is that this application or the the facts of this application, the

proposal for this event, the hours that it's to take place, the location in which

it is to take place and the issues and the concerns around it have already been explored,

considered, litigated by your colleagues on the licencing subcommittee in relation to

this space. That consideration didn't take place a long time ago. It didn't take place

in relation to a different year, but in fact took place in spring this year in relation

to an event that was due to take place in the summer.

As you may be aware, Councillors, or you may not,

an application was previously submitted for Existence

Festival for this site for an event that was scheduled

to take place in June 2026.

The application was submitted on behalf

of a company called Anthropos, who were previously

involved in the operational side of the event that

is to take place.

The objections received to that application that was submitted in March of this year and

heard in May of this year are very similar in number, in content, in nature, in location,

as those objections that are before you for consideration today.

And this application or an application very similar to this and those objections were

considered by your colleagues on the 11th of May this year.

They heard the concerns raised, which were similar to those that are before you in your

agenda papers today, and they determined that the application be granted.

They issued a licence for an event to be known as Existence Festival to take place on this

premises, as I say, intended to be in June of this year.

The committee at the time did not grant the event because it was to be held in June.

There are no special features of the June application that differentiate it from the same event that is proposed to take place in September of this year.

The committee granted the licence and were happy that an event operated over this same number of days to these hours with these activities on one occasion a year would not undermine the licencing objectives.

subject, of course, to the appropriate safeguards being in place in terms of the management

and operation of that event.

Now, of course, Councillors, each application must be considered on its own merits. This

is a separate and new application. But at the same time, I would respectfully and gently

submit that were the decision today to be different to that one that was made in May,

there should be cogent reasons for that to be the case. And we would submit, I would

submit on behalf of the applicant that those do not exist because the position around this

event has not changed in the period since that previous licence was granted. That previous

licence is still in existence, but the June event was not held. The event was postponed.

That separate licence is not held by my client and my client proposes one event to take place

along the same lines, as I say, same hours, activities, length of event, et cetera, in

September this year.

The conditions offered as part of this application to be attached to the licence, should you

be minded to grant it, are the same as those that were imposed on the licence granted by

your colleagues in May.

In fact, there are additional safeguards as compared to that licence granted, which we

would submit to improve the position as versus where we were in May when this application

was brought before your colleagues.

The previous licence that was granted referred to events to be held on one occasion per calendar year and extended through to 2027.

This application seeks a time limited licence which does specify a period of grant of a year, but a condition is offered within this application that only one event will be held under this licence and that will be in September of 2026.

As I say, there are a couple of other safeguards and improvements in relation to this application

as compared to the one that was heard in May, and I will detail those through the course

of my submissions.

The second important factor that I would like to highlight and draw your attention to, Councillors,

is the absence of representation before you today from responsible authorities.

As you have heard from the licencing officer, there were initially representations submitted

on behalf of your pollution control team in relation to concerns around both water and

noise.

Those representations have now been withdrawn, and they've been withdrawn because the concerns

raised within them have been satisfied.

In terms of water, we can confirm, as discussed, that there are arrangements in place to ensure

that the borehole and that the community water supply is not drawn upon at all with regards

to this event.

And I'll allow Daniel shortly when you have questions, Councillors, to give you more practical

detail on exactly how that will work.

But suffice to say, water will be supplied by an independent third party contractor.

And as Kevin said, the arrangements for that have been approved by your pollution control

team.

We're also very happy, should Councillors wish to provide additional clarity and additional

comfort, should you be minded to grant the licence, for that to be added as a specific

licenced condition rather than as something which appears in the event management plan,

so a specific condition that the community water supply and the borehole will not be

drawn on at all for any events taking place under this licence.

The pollution control team in terms of noise councillors have also, as I say, withdrawn

their representation, and that's following site of the noise management plan for the

event, which forms part of the event management plan that my client has put together.

In terms of crime and disorder, the police have not lodged any representation at all

in relation to this application. There wasn't one initially, there wasn't anything additional

that they felt needed to be agreed. In regards to that, Councillors, I would submit that

the absence of responsible authority representation should be given significant weight here. In

relation to that, I would point you to paragraph 9 .12 of the section 182 guidance, which provides

that each responsible authority will be an expert in their respective field. It goes

on to say that a particular responsible authority will be a licencing authority's main source

of advice in relation to a particular licencing objective. So your experts, the custodians

of your policy in terms of crime and disorder, are content that the granting of this application

on the basis that it is before you will not undermine the licencing objectives. And your

experts in terms of nuisance are similarly content in that regard. So as I say, I would

submit that you should give that significant weight in your deliberations today, Councillors.

The responsible authorities in considering this application will no doubt have been aware

of the various possible issues that can arise in relation to an event of this type, but

they are satisfied with the safeguards that have been proposed by my client in the event

management plan. My client has engaged extensively with the safety advisory group in putting

together their event management plan and to finalise the event management plan for this

event. So your experts have had significant oversight in terms of scrutiny of the granular

detail as to how this event is intended to be operated day to day in advance of this

application being made. There is suggestion in some of the representations that sufficient

thought has not been given to various aspects of how this event will be run, but that simply

is not the case. A very extensive event management plan has been put together, as is recommended

by your licencing policy in relation to large -scale events, and that has been fed through the

Safety Advisory Group and discussed and refined. The event management plan has not been submitted

with the application. It's a very extensive document, running to 80 to 100 pages. It's

not something that anybody could reasonably expect you as a committee or residents to

run through in detail and on a line -by -line basis. That said, if you have any queries

about the event management plan, details of exactly how certain practical arrangements

will be delivered, then Daniel will be able to answer any of those questions that you

have today. But as I say, it is an operational document with huge amounts of detail in it

that your expert responsible authorities have scrutinised and have found to be in order.

So again, I would submit that this fact must be given fairly significant weight.

That said, Councillors, there is clearly a huge strength of feeling before you on the part of residents in the area where this event is proposed to take place and concerns remaining with regards to various matters.

It wouldn't be proper of me, it would be remiss of me therefore not to address those various concerns before you

and to provide on behalf of my client additional reassurance about how the event will be operated.

I suspect all parties in the room will be pleased to hear that I don't intend to delve into the representations on an individual case by case, line by line basis

but what I'll do if it suits councillors is just address some of the broad themes that repeat themselves within the representations that have been submitted.

No discourtesy meant to any of the residents in terms of not addressing them personally

and individually, but again in terms of the time we have I will address broad themes.

Before I do that I'll just quickly address a misconception which appears within a couple

of the representations in terms of the number of people that are intended or that my client

intends to attend this event.

There are concerns within some of the representations that actually this licence would permit up

to 5 ,000 people to attend at the festival if you were minded to grant the licence.

That absolutely isn't the case and absolutely isn't the intention of my client in making

this application. As your legal advisor will be able to confirm when submitting a licence

application, you are required to specify if your capacity is going to be above 5 ,000.

If it's going to be less than 5 ,000, you pay the ordinary fee for the submission of an

and above $5 ,000 you attract higher fee levels.

So my client has applied for a licence which,

without restriction, would allow for up to 5 ,000 people,

but has offered a condition which would be attached

to the licence should you be minded to grant it,

that no more than 2 ,000 people at a time

will attend the event that takes place.

In reality, councillors, my client's anticipating

no more than around $1 ,500 based on ticket sales, et cetera.

Moving on then to the more substantive concerns raised in the course of the representations.

The first and most obvious of those is simply noise levels from the entertainment proposed

to be carried out at the event.

Okay, sorry, I don't want to interrupt.

Am I right to continue?

No, that's okay.

No, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't...

You weren't missing anything from me.

That's fine.

So we appreciate of course there is a concern that music noise will carry, but as the committee

will appreciate, there is of course a difference between the potential for music being audible

at some points and music being at such a level as to cause a nuisance.

As you've heard, the applicant has agreed with the Pollution Control Team noise levels

to be adhered to at noise sensitive properties and this has allowed them to withdraw their

objection.

My client has invested significantly in professional noise management at a substantial cost to the event because that is the right thing to do.

It demonstrates the commitment of my client to ensure compliance with these sound levels and to ensure that the levels do not cause a nuisance.

My client's acoustic consultant is here with us remotely, councillors, and will be happy to answer technical questions that you might have in this regard.

I don't profess myself to be an expert on technical noise attenuation issues, but he

will be able to answer any questions that you do have.

My client acknowledges the evidence submitted of a noise abatement notice in respect of

a previous event in another location.

This was issued to the previous operators of the festival under this name who were not

involved in this proposed event.

My client is aware that this was served due to agreed sound levels having been exceeded during a prior event.

We'd like to assure you, councillors, that this absolutely will not occur on my client's watch.

My client has employed new sound engineers for this event.

I'll ask Chris, who is here with us, to detail his credentials for you.

If you'd like to hear about those, once I've finished my submissions, he'll be happy to take any questions from you.

The second concern that is raised on a reasonably regular basis within the representations is

emergency access to the site.

Arrangements have been made within the event management plan for emergency access and all

emergency services involved in the safety advisory group are satisfied with those arrangements.

The third is water supply, which I've already dealt with.

The fourth is broadly the competence of my client and the operational arrangements around

the event.

Some representations query the change of event date from June to September.

I wonder what this is indicative of.

It isn't indicative of anything other than that the event was not ready to be delivered at the time in June.

There had been a previous applicant holding the previous licence that I detailed at the start of my submissions

who was involved in operational and compliance matters for this event

and who was unable to continue to provide those and therefore that arrangement was terminated.

My client has employed a new team of specialists to assist in operating this event, including

a safety consultancy, a very well respected safety consultancy known as Greenlight.

The fifth is the suggestion that the event will be associated with issues of disorder

and suggestion that this may be linked to drug and alcohol consumption.

It is my client's position that this will not be the case.

This is a fairly niche festival in terms of the music type and the demographic that it

tracks and I'm sure Daniel will be happy to talk to you about the sort of event that it

is, but the culture of it is all around focus on the music and the outdoors and the people

who attend this event are people who will attend regular events of the sort that my

client operates.

The events attend D -Bass based on previous years, has an approximate average age of around

35, drawn from a mix of ages typically between around 25 all the way up to 60 plus.

So it's not a music genre that tends to attract a lot of very young people.

The applicant's operational history doesn't evidence significant incidents of antisocial

behaviour from the attending crowd.

There is reference to my client's implementation of a drugs awareness and harm reduction policy

and a suggestion that this is a negative feature of the application, something that acknowledges

that this will be prevalent.

That isn't the case, Councillors, it is something that any responsible festival operator would have in place, and something which authorities would expect to see.

Linked is a concern that anyone refused entry to or rejected from the event will be released into the surrounding community without support or assistance.

Again, this simply will not be the case. There are welfare arrangements which form part of the approved event management plan.

There is also a concern with regards to children in terms of accessing the event. This is strictly

an 18 -plus event with Challenge 25 being operated both at access to the venue and at any points

of sale within the venue. Ticket purchasers have been advised of this on purchase and

it is very unusual these days for underage persons to risk spending hundreds of pounds

on tickets to an event that they know they are highly likely to be unable to access.

False identification simply isn't the issue that perhaps it was some years ago.

In terms of noise levels affecting children, we've discussed those.

And in terms of children's access to the site or visual access to the event,

the event is going to be very clearly buried, delineated, etc.

and with no access other than through the proper channels.

A further concern is the potential for trespass on neighbouring land.

Again, we would submit that this doesn't have the propensity to be an issue.

The event boundary will be securely delineated.

There will be no scope for breaching that boundary without serious and sustained effort.

And again, individuals who have paid hundreds of pounds to attend an event tend to want to stay within that event,

rather than try to go to such measures to escape it.

There's a concern around litter and whether that might impact on the wider community.

It has been my client's experience that the demographic of attendees at their events tend

to be fairly environmentally conscious and therefore levels of litter are actually less

than might be expected at a comparable sized event.

Additionally, much of the footprint is several hundred metres from the public highway and

therefore any rubbish that does exist is likely to be contained within that area.

Even with all of that said, my client is happy to conduct a full litter pick of the surrounding

road network following the conclusion of the event. There's concern around light

pollution. All stage lighting is rigged beneath tented stage structures and

directed downwards. The design does not project light upwards into the sky. Site

lighting is limited to things like festoon style lighting and we would say

no pyrotechnics or fireworks or anything of that description will be used at the

event. There's a concern around strain on the emergency services but I would again

point out that they were involved in the safety advisory group discussions around this event.

There are concerns around fire safety that this has not been considered.

It absolutely has as part of the event management plan.

Various measures are included in the event management plan in that regard.

And again to save a little time if you'd like to hear those detailed

then Daniel will be able to talk you through them.

But that fire strategy has been created with Green Light Safety Consultancy and again signed off by the fire authority

as part of the safety advisory group.

There are other issues which are raised,

but which your report at paragraph 3 .3 states

are not relevant to the licencing objectives.

So I won't spend time dealing with those in my submissions

now.

A number of representations also,

councillors mention a wedding due to take place

on the Saturday of the event that my client proposes.

And my client and I absolutely understand

the anxiety around this.

Every couple wants to ensure that their wedding day is absolutely perfect.

My client understands that but would submit that this event simply does not risk issues being caused to this wedding.

The date of the two events being simultaneous does not engage the licencing objectives unless a nuisance is caused

and this simply will not be the case.

The venue where the event is to take place sits around a mile away from where the church and the reception will take place

and there is a noise management plan in place to ensure that occupiers of properties much

closer than this will not be disturbed. No doubt the wedding reception will involve a

certain amount of noise and music of its own, so we're not looking to maintain an environment

here for an event that needs to exist in silence, and we're talking about a fair distance for

sound to carry. My client has engaged with the family who are holding the wedding on

this date and is aware that they're particularly concerned around the time of speeches, which

obviously is a time at a wedding where you would want more quiet than perhaps later into

the evening reception. My clients agreed to close one of the stages at the time that the

family are most concerned about to reduce the potential decibel levels even more, albeit

my client is confident that the levels would have been appropriate without that additional

measure. That they'd like to demonstrate that they are going above and beyond what they're

advised is necessary here to ensure and to provide additional comfort. In terms

of traffic interaction with the wedding that's due to take place, my client

has a robust traffic management plan but in any case it's highly unlikely that

any vehicle movement times will be simultaneous here given that my client's

event starts on the Thursday and concludes on the Monday and the vast

majority of attendees will attend for that entire period. So there will not be

lot of vehicle movement from my client's event taking place on that Saturday.

This is also relevant when considering the expressed concern of festival

attendees viewing the marquee as part of the event or having some

confusion around what's going on with the wedding. As I say the the venues are

reasonably far apart but in any case festival goers will be safely on site

on the Thursday and Friday and will not be looking for a venue to attend come

the Saturday. We would submit therefore that there simply isn't any prospect of confusion

here. I'm aware that Mr Roberts appears on behalf of the previous owner and the current

owners of the property that sits nearest to the site where this event is proposed to take

place. Albeit I'm not sure that the new occupiers are in residence as yet, but I know that they

intend to be by the time that the event takes place. The concerns that they raise in respect

of their representation mirror the general themes that I have discussed and I would submit

that my client has comprehensively addressed those issues. Our acoustic consultant is comfortable

that the noise levels agreed with the pollution control team can and will be adhered to at

this property, albeit by making some adjustments to what had previously been proposed. My client

can achieve the required and agreed noise levels at the property to ensure that nuisance

is not caused to its residential occupants. That is all that is required of it in a licencing

context. One final point I wish to make is that this

is not an application, again, and I did say this at the outset, but just to reiterate,

for a number of events in any calendar year, nor would this have the effect of being an

application for an event to take place in each calendar year going forward, as could

have been the case that it would have been entirely proper for such an application to

been made. As part of this application, my client has expressly offered a condition which

reads, one event only held over a total of five consecutive days in September 2026. So

as I say, despite the application on its face seeking a time limited period through to September

27, only one event, that event which is proposed for this year, can occur under this licence.

And it's completely fair to say, Councillors, that this open and rural space would absolutely

not be appropriate for a multitude of events to take place on. It would not be a place

for events to take place every weekend or even every month of a year. But once a year,

with proper planning and operational measures in place, we would submit that open, rural

spaces are wonderful places for people to gather together, enjoy music, enjoy themselves.

What I would also say is that given that this application before you is for one event only

to take place this year.

The following comfort and conclusion can be reached.

Should, in the circumstances, should all of the objectors,

the representers' worst fears come true,

should they be taken to their absolute maximum,

with all the safeguards considered and implemented

and approved by your responsible authorities failing utterly

and absolutely, with the responsible authorities being

wrong in their views about this event, which we have submitted

is a fanciful thought in itself, this event will end

and no others will be permitted under this licence.

It is one event over a set and defined period of time with clear and enforceable conditions

and an event management plan that's been scrutinised by experts.

But let's say that there are issues.

My client would have to come before you or your colleagues again to seek any permission

to repeat this event next year and they'll be carrying out the event under the no doubt

watchful eyes of those who have objected if you do decide to grant this licence.

I have no doubt, Councillor, that they would be given very short shrift by you if they

don't deliver on their promises this year.

We would submit that unevidenced concerns and fears are not a reason to refuse this

application.

The fears that the residents have are understandable, but they are not founded in evidence and they

are addressed by the safeguards and the measures that my client has put in place.

Your colleagues were aware of that when they made their previous determination and we would

I respectfully invite you to agree with them.

I would refer you before I conclude to a number of documents.

Again the Section 182 guidance at 1 .18 which says when making licencing decisions all licencing

authorities should consider the need to promote growth and deliver economic benefit.

We would submit that this application if granted would do that with this event in the area.

I would refer to the National Licencing Policy Framework, which came into force in November

2025, which says that we need a licencing system that is flexible and responsive, a

tool for enabling innovation and investment, not just managing risk.

It also says that licencing should support a diverse range of venues and experiences

that reflect the UK's rich hospitality and leisure offer.

Specifically, the framework recognises the need for a light touch for responsible operators

and says that licencing should be permissive by design.

On this basis, Councillors, I would invite you to grant the application as submitted,

subject to additional conditions which I have referenced through the course of my submissions.

Firstly, that the water supply to the site shall be provided by a third party contractor

and the site shall not at any point draw on the community water supply or the Ashley or

that a full letter pick of the surrounding road network shall be completed within 48

hours of the conclusion of the event and that no pyrotechnics or fireworks be used at any

point at the premises.

Various other matters that Councillors are dealt with, as I've said, within the event

management policy, but as I say, if there are any particular concerns or queries you

have about the practical aspects of the operation of this event, Daniel will be able to answer

those questions for you.

And indeed, if there are any issues or any specifics that you would like to be drawn

out of that event management plan to be included as licence conditions for clarity, then we're

very happy to engage in discussions on that as well.

Thank you so much for your time. I hope I haven't bored you too much. But that's the

conclusion of my submissions, and you have three gentlemen here who would be very happy

to answer any questions that you might have.

Thank you very much for your submission.

Seat 1 - 0:37:40

Sorry.

Something I forgot at the beginning, if you've got a mobile phone, could you please put it

on mute in case one goes off in the meantime?

Also, I'm not listening to Test Match Special here.

I've got hearing loss, so there's a wonderful system here which allows me to hear the speakers.

I would like to open now to members to ask any questions of the applicant

representatives or the applicants or the experts we've got in front of us.

Who wants to go first?

I don't mind, I'll go first.

Seat 8 - 0:38:26

I've got a number of questions. Do you want to do them all at once?

Yeah, take them one at a time.

thank you for the information it's it's helpful I've a number of areas just to

explore you mentioned 2 ,000 people on site is that 2 ,000 tickets

potentially so it up to a maximum of 2 ,000 including staff okay and are you

doing any on day ticket sales or are you planning on doing so? We don't do day

Seat 29 - 0:39:04

sales but we'll do rest of the weekend sales if we don't sell out which looks

very likely. So someone could come on Saturday afternoon and stay through

Saturday and Sunday. Someone could come Sunday morning and stay through Sunday

but there won't be anyone coming on Saturday and then being like not having

access on the Sunday. First of all that would be burdensome for us to traffic.

Secondly we don't want people going in and out over the course of the weekend.

A key part of our offering in terms of the traffic management is that each car comes in, does the event and essentially leaves.

So we're trying to discourage a back and forth thoroughfare.

Seat 8 - 0:39:35

Thank you. Just just then clarification. What's the maximum number of tickets? You mentioned selling out.

Seat 29 - 0:39:43

What's the maximum number of tickets that you envisage? We could go to 1600 tickets sold, but I can tell you now that's not going to happen.

Seat 8 - 0:39:47

Thank you. I think you've answered my second question, which was this this is a camping staying at the festival event.

Seat 29 - 0:39:59

So as you say, one comes in, they don't then go out until the end of the weekend or at some point where they decide.

No, no, we don't have those. It's camping or live -in vehicles, but again, it's on -site.

On -site, thank you. Thank you for that clarification.

Seat 8 - 0:40:09

Just onto the noise aspect.

I don't know what 43 decibels per LA EQ 15 minutes actually means.

Could you give me an example of what that would translate to under normal?

The gentleman on.

Yes. In terms of equating to that, there is in the noise management plan on page 23, a decibel comparison chart.

Forty -three decibels is just above the noise of a fridge.

Seat 8 - 0:40:49

Seat 8 - 0:40:53

that we don't have that we don't have that comparator so when you say when you say that

is that is there any time there any time bound on that so is it over a period of time for that noise

to be present yeah i i can give you another example of that and the reason why 43 decibels

is chosen for music events running after 2300 in the UK. So events that are running into

the early hours of the morning. The reason why that figure is chosen, it's normally between

43 and 45 decibels. There are examples of 50 decibels with events running until three

or four in the morning that I personally work on. It's to do with the World Health Organisation

decibel levels that are acceptable inside people's bedrooms and homes. The 43 decibels

is a measure from the outside of property as to what would be inaudible inside the property

even if the residents would have the windows open for ventilation.

Seat 8 - 0:42:01

I'm not entirely sure. If I have my windows open for ventilation the noise is pretty much

as it is outside, just as an observation.

What I'm trying to explain is that that figure is part of national guidance and used by thousands

of festivals in terms of being at a level that isn't going to disturb someone trying

to sleep.

So, if a fridge was outside in your rear or front garden, it wouldn't be disturbing you

with the window open trying to sleep.

And there's a reduction that's quite significant from daytime noise levels to the 11 o 'clock

p .m. threshold, where the pendulum of balancing the rights of residents shifts very much firmly

in terms of people needing to sleep.

This event has so much acoustic barrier treatment and special use of technology that the daytime

level is significantly below where the legal allowance would be in terms of noise regulations

Seat 8 - 0:43:10

for events in the UK.

Thank you.

Just explore that a little bit further.

When you say it's the noise of a fridge, okay, 43 decibels is the noise of a fridge, how

far away are you planning on measuring that?

How far away will hear the noise of a fridge and by inference, therefore, anything closer

will hear more than the sound of a fridge. Oh so 43 decibels is the limit that's been set

and obviously are you quite right the further that you are away the less it will be. I'm have

the benefit of having a computer with the details in front of me but it is described in

the noise management plan. Just one second. So the decibel levels in the village to the

north, which is Ashley, are going to be three decibels lower than that at 40 decibels from

the residential properties. Again, this is a level shown to be inaudible within someone's

So you will be able to faintly hear it on the outside, but you wouldn't be able to discern

the type of music or if it was a male or female singer.

And the attenuation of a house, even with the windows open, that's the reduction in

noise levels from outside the property to inside, is around about 12 decibels.

and the World Health Organisation explains that a property inside in order to be comfortable

for a resident should be around 34 decibels a -weighted. You also asked a question in terms

of how that is measured. It's measured over a 15 minute period. It's an average of that

acoustic energy over a 15 minute period. The residents that are towards the northwest are

even lower at 38 decibels.

The residents that are towards the West -Southwest, 35,

which is very similar to what the background noise levels

would be without the event taking place.

Seat 8 - 0:45:28

Just, sorry, can I please go in?

Yeah, 43 decibels and the sound of a fridge

makes it sound like it's going to be very quiet.

I've been to festivals and I've heard the Royal Agricultural University having its

summer board and I live two miles away and it's not quiet. How many how many

houses will have a higher night time decibel noise level greater than 43?

Because there will be some properties closer to the site. So the closest

property to the site is the, sorry I can't remember all the names off the top of my head,

Ashley Marsh Farm is going to be receiving 43 decibels. Every other property would be receiving

less than that by two to three decibels. Decibels are logarithmic, so a three decibel

Seat 8 - 0:46:37

reduction in noise or an increase of three decibels is perceptually twice as loud.

So if I get this right, the assertion is that there will be no properties that will have

a noise disruption overnight greater than 43 decibels.

That's correct.

None at all.

There are very few properties within this area.

For example, there are a number of representations and the wedding not least in Ashley.

Ashley is over a kilometre away, which is quite a good distance away from a music event of this size and nature.

It's not uncommon to have a music event that's on the outside of a larger town that may only be as close as 300, 350 metres, which is three football pitch lengths.

So, you know, you would be able to see the rooftops and the houses from the festival

site.

You're not able to see Ashley from the festival site.

It is quite a distance away.

I personally work with a team of acoustic consultants measuring both the stages at the

event and also off -site residential properties to ensure that the daytime levels are always

compliant with the licence and the nighttime levels.

the change in volume to reduce it in order for residents sleep comfort. All the stages

are logged in every 15 minutes what the level is from the stage and we correlate that with

off -site measurements so we can be in multiple locations all at the same time. So far this

year we've managed the acoustics for just short of a million people in the audience

and there are more than that in the local communities that they serve and we

have very few complaints from our work. We're able to have minute -to -minute

accuracy in terms of the average sounds. Apologies, I have to switch my phone off, but my

watch just called. We have very few residential complaints and we work with

the community as much as with event organisers. So anyone that has concerns

about noise, we'll be able to ring the event and report an issue and often I'm very welcome of

people reporting a noise because it gives us an opportunity to meet that resident and also address

or speak to them directly with concerns and to take a measurement. But it's critically important

that each 15 -minute period is at or below the specified limits in the licence and it's

critically important for us because our work is reliant on the quality of work we produce,

not least for environmental health officers,

but also for event organisers.

And the third part of our triangle at work

is with the community.

We want to be welcomed in the community.

We want to be a welcome face

and people know that there's good control.

After the event, we post a report

that will give each of the acoustic measurements

that have been taken.

That's every 15 minute from every stage.

And that's correlated with decibel readings

from a sound level metre at residential properties which will show exactly the cause and effect

from the event to the property. It's a very precise operation. We will have six sound

level metres, four of them permanently recorded and two of them are used as a handheld devices

to go out to properties. It's nearly £60 ,000 worth of technical equipment and we've become

very good at the work that we do over the last 12 years.

Seat 8 - 0:50:15

Thank you. Can I just for my clarity and the committee's clarity and members of the public

that you'll be measuring noise on a 15 minute average.

Yeah. Close to residential properties closest to the site.

And if they were to exceed that 43 decibel level you will turn the volume down so that it is below

that over a 15 -minute average?

Yes, so for example, if someone called

that we haven't been regularly monitoring

and we attend that property, we will normally

get to that property within a 15 -minute period.

If we discover that there is any undue noise,

so the overall average, say the nighttime of 43 dB,

it happens to be louder than that from the music noise

level, we have an on -site team and an off -site team.

we're able to report and make those adjustments.

Because we have permanent monitoring at what's called the front of house position,

where the sound engineer would be in charge of the speakers.

We have knowledge of each third band octave frequency.

If you imagine a graphic equaliser on your hi -fi,

every single frequency can be controlled in a down and a balance point of view.

That's how we affect the overall average,

the overall volume of the music at all times.

So say for example, a property is having undue bass beat,

and we would be able to look at rebalancing

that graphic equaliser for this stage,

and we would have foreknowledge

as to which stage is causing which frequency.

So correlation is important.

So when you measure at one location and another,

you can see the impact of the music.

So as it goes up one decibel at the event stage,

it would also equally go up one decibel at the property that we're dealing with.

The properties that we'll be monitoring from are all around the compass of the event as far away as,

I think it's 1 .2 kilometres to Ashley, forgive me if I've got that wrong, but I'm focusing on looking at you

on the committee table rather than looking at the noise propagation model.

But we have a noise propagation model which is a scientific computer modelling,

It's used for planning applications and licencing applications.

It's actually unfavourable in the way that it projects,

as if the wind is going in all directions of the compass.

So all 360 degrees of wind in all directions at five metres per second.

So essentially, the noise modelling is the worst case scenario.

Everywhere that isn't having the wind going towards it

from the event would actually be less than our predictions.

and the event has a number of different acoustic treatments such as large

acoustic barriers which actually absorb low -frequency sound, the bass beat, as

well as the mid and high frequencies and we also have special systems with the PA

supplier where we can control the directivity of each of the frequencies

including low frequency. What we want to do is contain more sound on -site for the

people that have bought a ticket, whilst always reducing the impact for residents.

I've just come from a concert series in Liverpool where there were 10 ,000 people living within

500 metres of the site.

We didn't have one complaint from that event.

There were 45 ,000 people in the park.

So this isn't just giving you the right answers for the right outcome from you.

This is proven scientific method of managing events.

and it's all in line with the Code of Practise for control of outdoor concerts in terms of

environmental control. I also sit on the UK Noise Council, which is a joint old party

working group of the Institute of Acoustics and the Chartered Institute of Environmental

Health. We're currently reviewing the Code of Practise for control of outdoor music events.

Seat 8 - 0:54:24

So I really am able to profess I've been an expert in terms of noise management for

repents.

Okay, thank you.

Just back to my kind of original question on this, that last original question.

The commitment from the applicant and its noise consultants is that there will be no

property that will have a noise level of greater than 43 decibels on a

15 -minute average at any point between 2 ,300 and 400 hours because if that is

detected then the noise will be turned down so that it's not...

Yes, that's the case. It would be two o 'clock in the morning.

Two o 'clock in the morning. Okay, well no, we've got the old...

Yeah, we think you've copied something here.

That's only for two of the evenings, not all three of the evenings.

So the amount of hours we're talking about this level is about six hours over the course of the week.

That's fine, but it's just that during the time on which the music is after 2300 hours,

there will be no property that has a noise level above the noise of a fridge.

Seat 28 - 0:55:25

Just if I can jump in and assist there, Councillors as well, that is offered as a condition to be attached to the licence.

Seat 8 - 0:55:32

So yes, that's correct, yeah.

What time does the music go off and then start again?

It goes off at 2.

Seat 8 - 0:55:44

2 a .m. and then 10 a .m. So it's 8 a .m.

And what noise level do you anticipate during the day? Sorry to keep going on about noise.

Seat 28 - 0:55:52

Decibels wise.

Yeah, I can answer that for you as well.

So the off -site level residential properties during the day, the loudest location will be 59 decibels,

which is closer to the event than others, but the ones that are around about 800 metres to 1100 metres away

are only three to four decibels higher than the nighttime, ranging from 43 to 45.

So this is a very well -contained event.

The acceptable daytime noise level from a music event

is up to 65 decibels,

which would be clearly audible in the full spectrum.

But because of the treatment and work we've done

to ensure that the after 11 o 'clock to two o 'clock

in the morning is a viable prospect,

the same acoustic treatment is in existence during the day.

So people will be able to hear it more during the day,

but if they were mowing the lawn or listening to the radio

or the television, or if they had a marquee in their garden

and had music on during their own celebrations,

our event will mostly be inaudible.

If two of us were stood in the street in Ashley

having a conversation together,

we would have to stop talking to hear the event.

Two people having a conversation is the equivalent

Seat 8 - 0:57:21

of 65 decibels, A -weighted.

And are you planning to monitor noise levels during the daytime performance from 10 a .m.

and if it hits above the 65 will you be taking the similar similar action to reduce the noise?

Yes, completely. So our team are working from any time that music noise is taking place.

So we'll have already started work before 10 o 'clock in the morning. Our equipment on site is

recording and logging data.

It logs it on a minute by minute frequency,

but we're looking for the 15 minute result

as we go through the day.

All of those microphone data results

are available after the event.

So you will literally see on a graph

when a stage is turned off and when it has turned back on.

And we correlate that with offsite data.

On average, we would probably take anywhere

between 30 and 60 noise measurements offsite

on a daily basis. We tend to do a sweep around the compass points of the event having observed

the weather and the wind conditions. And what we're looking for is identifying where the

loudest area of residential noise is, knowing that if we found the loudest one or loudest

two areas, they are where we need to manage the event from, knowing that all of the properties

would be lower. Once the event is stable and balanced, for example, we would then do another

sweep around all of the compass points of residential areas to cheque those levels. Our

primary purpose is to, well, not primary, but one of the main purposes is we produce

a post -event noise report which goes into the environmental health offices. We're happy

to suggest that as a condition for the licence and demonstratively shows what the stage sound

power levels were before 11 and after 11, and then also what they are at the nighttime

11 until 2 in the morning.

Whilst the music switches on at 10 in the morning, it's very unlikely that it would

be on at its fullest volume output because there would be fewer people around those stages.

So we're always balancing the music noise level for the audience appropriate for the size of the audience.

As you, those that have experience of music festivals, the busier periods are post dinner time, early dinner tea time, you know, five, six o 'clock onwards until the end of the night.

we tend to find that quite a few people that are early risers and morning risers will enjoy

the event until 11 or midnight and then our numbers start to reduce. One of the control

measures after 11 o 'clock is to switch off one of the stages and then all the other stages

reduce in their sound power output and we keep reducing it until we've got the right

decibel level at the loudest location and then we cheque rinse and repeat and that's

Seat 8 - 1:00:22

our rhythm as we go through each music event.

Okay, thank you.

Can I just, yeah, sorry, sorry to lay by this.

It just feels really, really important

given the impact of noise.

I think we've all experienced it.

I'm so sorry.

Seat 8 - 1:00:43

Seat 8 - 1:00:58

Sorry about the drama it's just noise funny enough it's funny yes we've got

multiple hearing loss on this just in this committee just just to go sorry to

labour the point again but if a resident proximate well any resident happens to

hear noise louder than a fridge from inside their homes at night, so over 43

decibels, they can phone a hotline to the applicant and you'll come out, measure it

and if it's above that limit you'll turn the noise down. So yeah to give an

example, say if you had called up and the phone would be answered by a

professional person, this job is there normally in the event control and I know

we provide a script to ask people what is the issue that they're experiencing.

They can also ring that line in terms of litter or traffic, but late on a night,

you're right to focus on noise. It's the biggest area where an event is likely to come into

conflict with the community. The phone will be answered. What we're specifically looking for is

the name of the person, the address.

Some residents in different places

are unsure about giving their address

and they don't want to visit.

They just want to report the noises disturbing them.

If they don't want to give their address,

we would ask people to give the postcode

or the village or town they're in

because we'd want to be able to get there and cheque.

Just because the event is audible during the day

doesn't necessarily mean it's too loud,

but inside people's property,

it should be to the degree of inaudible.

Inaudible is subjective, it's hard to measure.

So across on your committee table,

your level of hearing across the table

is different between each other.

I'm mentioning this as one of you has

the hearing aid assistance.

Now we all have slightly different hearing,

but we want to try and reduce the impact on any residents.

So if someone gives their name and address

and that they're willing for the consultant to come.

Upon arrival near the property,

we will set up a tripod and take a quick measurement.

We will have already asked the onsite team

as to what the levels of low frequency noise

and the A -weighted, the 15 minute average of the stage.

So we'll know which stage has more sound power.

Also the stages are pointing in different directions.

So directivity is quite important

in terms of sound reaching further places.

Once we've made an assessment, we're looking to see

if it's within the licencing conditions.

If it isn't, we'll make an adjustment to that,

stop the reading and show that there was a short reading

above the licencing conditions,

make a small adjustment if necessary,

and then take a full 15 minute reading.

And then we'll speak to the resident.

Often people in the community aren't even aware

that there's this level of control of noise for festivals or large concerts.

And we can help to try and put people's mind at ease.

The focus on the fridge is possibly the wrong.

If you Google, I can do it here for you.

There were a number of different things, but two people talking together,

one talking at a time is 65 decibels.

And that 20 decibel reduction down to 43 decibels

it is around about a quarter of that volume of two people talking.

Seat 8 - 1:04:36

Thank you. It did feel that the fridge noise was perhaps, fridge comparison was slightly

optimistic. Anyway, one final question if I may, Chair. How many local people are you

employing during the festival on a temporary basis? Are you using staff from Tepary and

Seat 30 - 1:04:58

the surrounding areas? There will be a number of locals. Come again.

How many?

Not quite a moment, but maybe it could be up to 10 to 15 % of our crew.

What's the crew size?

Seat 8 - 1:05:14

If you expected the crew size to be.

Seat 29 - 1:05:19

Top to bottom, if you include artists, crew, everyone else, it's the better part of 400

people.

To give you an idea, our security firm is locally based here.

We also wanted to use the most locally based water firm, Event Water.

However, they unfortunately had a physical injury and they can't work so I had to go

off site for them.

But we have tried our best.

Thank you.

That's me finally done, Chad.

Seat 1 - 1:05:38

Thank you.

Naomi.

Thank you.

Seat 3 - 1:05:41

Thank you, Chad.

Apologies about that.

There was a high pitch ringing and it was just really getting to me.

Apologies.

So I've got three questions.

I'll shout them all out and then you can give me your answers if you can.

So first of all, I'm so sorry, I've forgotten your name.

Rebecca, I'm so sorry.

Rebecca, you were talking about material differences between this and previous application for

the previous management company.

I would say that a material difference is the physical environment considering the lack

of water we've had and just the drought conditions.

There'll be significantly, I think, there'll be significantly more water required than

you can possibly plan for.

Do we have, well for example for emergencies, what contingencies do you have for getting more water on site if you're talking about you don't think you're going to have people coming in on Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

You think everybody will be in on Thursday and out on Monday again for example.

I'm also concerned about damage to the fields with the weight of the vehicles and things going back and forth about people using portable barbecues.

This is another question and that brings me to my next point.

You talked about people, again, staying on site the whole time.

If they're staying on site the whole time, they can't go out for supplies, what have

you got in place to make sure that everybody is healthy and watered and fed and so on and

so forth?

And finally, am I allowed to ask Chair about the rights of way diversion in this format?

Yes.

So as you'll know, there's a right of way, is it a bridle path or a whatever it is, through

the middle of the field.

and I was wondering are you putting in place plans for a diversion for that?

And if not, what are you doing to keep people safe who want to use that right of way?

Thank you.

Seat 29 - 1:07:37

Water then, particularly water in the case of emergencies?

Yes, certainly.

We have water that is, the volume levels of water that we're getting are significantly more than you would need

for the projected attendance.

It's something like 70 to 90 % more than you could need.

How is that calculated, sorry?

Based on each person drinking,

so I think the number for you is four and a half litres

per day or thereabouts.

And then just simply getting more of it in.

So it's not just one delivery.

It's essentially a daily delivery of water.

So the water functionality is to be set up on the Tuesday

during the setup of the event.

The first tanker comes on Wednesday.

The people from the public health are gonna come

and test it on the Wednesday,

which is a normal pre -testing thing.

And then we've got deliveries

essentially every day of the event.

If we are low on ticket sales,

we might cancel one of those

just because it would be overly burdensome

and like we won't need the water.

But I think right now ticket sales are at a point

where we'll be looking at a daily delivery of water,

which gives us a lot of buffer.

And then you get it offsite again afterwards.

Sorry?

Can you get it offsite again afterwards safely?

Yeah, I mean, we have to.

Don't we have a choice, do we?

Of course, it's set up and set down.

Yep, absolutely.

What's the next one?

So if we then talk about concern with regards to damage to the fields, both in terms of the drier conditions,

there was mention of barbecues and that sort of thing.

I know that you guys have got strict rules on that.

Look, I want to be clear, we take this very seriously.

I don't mean to be facetious, but you might notice from my voice, I'm natively Australian.

I've grown up with this risk.

Some people say South African.

Yeah, okay, thank you.

I've grown up with this all my life, it's pretty serious, but not everyone has and we're

dealing with somewhat of a reckoning this summer where people are learning some things

the hard way.

My expertise is not a substitute for a thousand people being safe in the field.

We have employed safety consultants to look at this in detail.

Our fire safety plan includes multiple different tangents.

So that fire extinguisher is dotted all over the place.

They're not just water, they're foam, they're CO2, they're all different types.

These are stationed at places like next to every generator, at every bar, in the campsite.

There's also other measures such as sand buckets. So our site map is full of fire safety stuff.

Our stewards, so we have stewards on site. They're generally there to give people directions

and watch out for anyone in distress like a welfare situation or a safeguarding situation.

Our stewards will be ramped up this year to watch out for fire safety risk. They are a surveillance

sort of function. So for me that's the biggest risk is the fire and I want them coached on that.

And we should be clear that the stewards are separate from the security team that's been

pulled.

So at any given time, you've got stewards, you've got security, and you've got the site

management team.

So you've got the better part of probably more than 20 people for a thousand attendees

awake at any given point in time looking at this.

We will do a full site walkthrough, it's part of licencing, to do a full site walkthrough

and cheque all of the risks before the gates are open.

We are sure that the safety company who are going to be on site with us on Wednesday and

Thursday will ensure that we have all the measures set up that were approved in the plan.

And you're not permitting any fires, barbecues, etc.

Yeah, absolutely. That's going to be the big thing that we ask for the security to search for.

I will be candid. That's going to be new for our attendees. You have to remember we normally run in June.

And it's not normally so hot in June, although this year it kind of was. So it is not lost on me that we'll have attendees who might not read the email we're going to send them.

and we'll bring a barbecue because they bought one last year, we will be confiscating those.

Like there'll be no fire on site, it would just be the wrong thing to do.

Gas stoves.

Yeah, no, not, everyone brings those little...

Sandals, lanterns.

Yeah, no, everyone brings those little portable stoves with the gas thing.

And we'll keep them fed by the way of, we've got four full -time food vendors on site, separate to the crew catering.

Seat 29 - 1:11:30

No, it's fine. Good question. We explored this. I actually worked pretty closely with

the PROW team at the Council, who are really, really good to deal with. There is a public

right of way that runs through. It is essentially south of the festival. It is south of the

camping by 120 metres, and it is just above the car park. I did explore diverting it,

because that seemed like an option. However, the way that it's a single public right of

and diverting it, which is send people to the road,

which they already know they can use anyway.

And it didn't feel like the right thing to do.

We're not closing that.

It doesn't make sense to restrict people's right of way.

Public right of way exists for a reason.

We're very happy to have people come and walk past

and see our festival at a distance of a hundred metres.

Anyone who's walking on that public right of way,

coming from west to east, for example,

as they traverse through the private land

that the PRW runs through,

would look to their right and 120 metres away,

they'll see a fence and then behind that they'll see some tents.

And to get through that bit of the fence, that is where the ticket inspectors for security

will be?

Yeah, we've got Stuart's place there and there's a security point.

The security will typically, they'll be wandering the campsite and then further north into the

arena.

So I guess if I'm answered, what I think is the question behind your question, if someone

was on the public right of way and they wanted to diverge and come to the festival, we are

secure.

Did that answer your question?

Yes.

Thank you.

Seat 1 - 1:12:58

Thank you.

I've got a couple of follow -ups.

Thank you, Paul, for the questions on noise.

I take it there will be no problem with our local council and environmental offices coming

Seat 29 - 1:13:16

down to double cheque what's happening?

No, they flagged that they'll be there, and we welcome it, of course.

or transparent?

Seat 1 - 1:13:21

The other question I had is the area is very much like the rest of the Cotswold.

It's a lot of single track highways, lanes.

I'm expecting there is already local traffic.

I mean the residents who live in the area drive up and down.

I do know there is a local company that has occasional HGVs arriving on the site, and

then the added traffic from visitors to the festival.

Will you have traffic stewards?

How will you regulate that?

Because essentially it's going to be a one -way system.

Seat 29 - 1:14:07

We will have CSAS accredited traffic marshals on ingress and egress during peak times.

So that's specifically defined as Thursday when the gates open in the afternoon and then Friday in the peak times which run from

About 11 a .m. Through to 7 p .m.

Out certain track our attendees don't tend to come in a big glut. So to give you a sense of the scale here

We're talking about no more than 600 cars

An average of like two people per car

They'll be flowing in throughout Thursday and Friday

So we'll have a CSA as a credit traffic marshal on the gate because they are the only people who are equipped to stop traffic

if needed.

We don't think that's gonna be necessary

because the flow of cars just isn't that.

And the site itself is huge.

To give you an idea, the holding parking,

which is beneath the main parking,

could itself fit the better part of a thousand cars.

So we don't expect there to be any buildup

of cars onto the road.

Like, I know there's a concern in the representations

about cars being backed up onto Crudwell Lane.

We just can't see that happening because it's logical

that we'll reel everyone in off the street

and then if we have a large amount of people to process

to get into the festival,

they'll be holding the holding parking.

So there's completely adequate space for all the cars there.

So we don't anticipate any kind of backups on Cragwell Lane.

To answer your other query

about just general throughput on the road,

we are cognizant that this is 500 extra cars coming in

and then coming out.

But this is a road that takes 30 HGV movements

per working day.

I don't think that sedans and camper vans

are likely to cause any more damage than is seen today.

And then the last thing I'll say,

I've forgotten what your third point was.

No, no, I think that I was asking about stewardship on the road, so I think that's it.

Can I come back?

I could have sworn that was the third point I had to make, but if it comes to me, I'll

tell you, I'm sorry.

Seat 3 - 1:15:50

Sorry, very good.

And there'll be stewardy people out on the Monday?

Seat 29 - 1:15:56

Yes, yes.

So, Sunday night, where we don't have many departures, but we'll have a CSAS steward

there, and all of Monday.

And keeping in mind that we will have a steward on the gate all weekend, it's just the CSAS

Seat 1 - 1:16:12

credit of want. Paul do you have any follow -ups?

Seat 1 - 1:16:22

Seat 9 - 1:16:25

Just a couple of little points, all the best ones have gone. Peeing on the land

of ammonia potentially if you pee on hedges and stuff. Are you putting

put signs saying please don't pee on the land?

I certainly can do so.

No one wants anyone peeing anywhere.

It stinks.

Transparently, I've been to parties where they don't do it

and it sucks.

Seat 29 - 1:16:47

We have urinals as well as toilets.

It is my lived experience that when

you put urinals in a party, people use them.

The parties where men tend not to have urinal access

tend to be the one where they pee on the land.

We believe that's covered, but I'm happy to sponsor

and we can put it into the licence

that will put up no peeing signs.

Seat 28 - 1:17:16

The application has the support of the landowner and the landowner's representative is here.

It's obviously going to be a priority for them that the land is treated well during

the course of the event and is left in a good condition once it's finished.

Seat 9 - 1:17:32

Seat 29 - 1:17:39

Have you estimated how many tankers are going to come as a result of this?

Each refill tanker is 20 ,000 litres.

So we start with 30 ,000 and then we get topped up by 20 ,000 on each delivery.

We have committed that if we believe attendance is going to go over 1 ,200 people in total,

including not just tickets but total, then we'll get one daily delivery.

If we believe that attendance is going to come in less than 1 ,200 people,

there'll be one day that doesn't have delivery.

But each delivery is 20 ,000 which comes in on HTV.

Seat 9 - 1:18:10

Actually, that's only like one or two tankers a day.

It's not that much.

Seat 29 - 1:18:19

What are people doing for showering or are they just waiting till they go home?

We have showers.

There's a pretty robust set of numbers in the plan that, like, to give you an idea,

Our water management plan assumes many litres consumed

per person per day.

It assumes that they have not bought any of their own water.

So that's a total thing.

It assumes that the showers are turned on every single,

every shower is turned on every minute of every day

for the 11 hours a day that they're open,

which are the daylight hours.

Pragmatically, that's not the case

because like they will be off every so often.

The numbers are backed up by some of the maths

that was suggested in the purple guide.

And like we believe they're fit for purpose

in terms of everyone's water usage.

I'm happy to take you through them.

Seat 8 - 1:18:59

Thank you.

That sounds like what a lot of water.

However if it's unseasonally hot at the time and it looks like your water is running low,

do you have a contingency plan to ensure that you can get additional supplies so that folks

Seat 29 - 1:19:16

are healthy and you don't need to go anywhere near the borehole?

We are absolutely committed to not going into the borehole.

That was an action taken on the back of resident concerns heard in June.

It is our view that the previous licensee did not correctly respond to those concerns,

which is why we proactively sought out the third party water, which comes at significant

expense to ourselves, but is of course the right thing to do.

The water plan has such a buffer in it that is unlikely that we will run out.

Like I want to stress, like we've got like significant buffer in there, particularly

with the daily deliveries, which we anticipate because we are going to go over 1200 totally

onsite.

We can get another one at a minute's notice.

There is a cost involved.

Kevin from the water company, we could easily give him a call and say, hey, Kevin, bring

us two tomorrow.

But we believe that the plan has enough buffer in it that that's not going to be required.

Seat 8 - 1:20:02

But we are cognizant of it and it is available.

So if it didn't have enough buffer, you commit that you would make sure that there is plenty

of water on site for health and drinking, et cetera?

Seat 29 - 1:20:10

There is.

And I also want to stress, not stress, but I want to add, we will be buying bottled water

at scale.

The reason for that is you need that in case there's a failing of the water company.

So like one unlikely but hypothetically potential scenario is say on Sunday morning delivery

comes of that water and it's not wholesome, doesn't pass the tests for whatever reason.

We need to have enough water to keep people safe.

So we have cases upon cases of purchase water also available.

That also can be a buffer for hot weather.

Seat 8 - 1:20:42

So I feel content doing the right things on water.

And that bottled water will be distributed free of charge.

Seat 1 - 1:20:50

That answers your question, sir.

Yes.

Thank you.

Looking left and right, I think I'm going to go on now to ask members of the public.

We've got seven people who applied to speak.

In terms of time management, we gave 25 minutes to the applicants to make their decision.

I would like to try and limit the seven speakers to one hour.

That means about 10 minutes each.

If you need 10 minutes, you don't have to do 10 minutes.

Seat 1 - 1:21:34

Seat 1 - 1:21:43

The order we got, well, what I would do, what I would like to propose if my fellow members

agree is that we ask the parish councils who have a speaker to speak first.

Thank you very much.

then the ward member and then members of the public.

Seat 1 - 1:22:18

Seat 24 - 1:22:26

If all speakers, when it's their turn,

would just come to this seat over here,

Seat 1 - 1:22:34

this is the spot that the mic's been set up.

Did you have a question, sir?

Sorry sir, I was just...

Seat 1 - 1:23:01

Would you like to speak?

I would like to speak on the last word.

If you could just hand up.

Yeah, I was going to just hand up.

Sorry?

Seat 1 - 1:23:14

Yeah, that's fine. Thank you very much indeed.

We have our first speaker as a second.

Seat 1 - 1:23:23

Seat 22 - 1:23:24

Can I just...

Please.

Seat 3 - 1:23:26

I'm going to be a bit mean now.

While the applicant and agents are speaking,

I did see a few faces and gesturing in the public.

I would like to remind everybody to please be polite

to everyone who's speaking and not make faces and gestures

because I'm sure the agent applicants won't make faces

and gestures at you when you're speaking.

Seat 1 - 1:23:48

Thank you.

I'm going to, as I say, it's all speakers.

I'm going to try and stick to 10 minutes.

Don't have to do 10 minutes, but, and again,

And as we get further down the line, please don't repeat points that have already been

made. It doesn't add extra weight the more time it's said. So I would like to invite

Seat 22 - 1:24:18

our first speaker to introduce yourself and yeah, start your speaking.

I'm Di Thomas. I am chair of Long Newton Parish Council, which is the parish where the event

is due to take place. I've got a number of points I'd like to

raise pertaining to the application but I have a question first. The documents

that were issued by ERS state the licence will be determined using the

council's licence statement policy of 2021 which is this one I believe. In

there we have section 11 which relates to large -scale events. On section 11

point two it states it is recommended that a premise licence application

should be admitted ideally six months before the event starts we all get that

because that makes perfect sense to us not being here like we are now shotgun

against our head however it does then stay but not less than three months now

we have an application in front of us this is dated the 20 and we get exactly

date of the 26th of June. Unless there is a calendar that I am not aware of, 26th of

June to the 3rd of September is not three months. I would quite like to understand is

it a valid application or is there a procedure that you have that is not currently in the

public domain that if there is a non -conformance, what is the protocol for it, who is the authority

to sign it off because I think that's quite important that we understand that

if we are going to go to the point where we might choose to appeal I need to

Seat 1 - 1:25:58

Seat 24 - 1:26:00

understand what that status is. I will ask our officer to respond to that thank

you. The standard of licencing policy is a guidance document that is that is

produced which we we do use for guidance and what we intend to follow. It does not

override the Licencing Act 2003 and there are no timescales within the Licencing Act that restricts when somebody can make an application.

So while

we do have guidance that we would like to meet where we can,

we cannot stop somebody applying for a licence outside of those periods and they would be determined in this forum.

Seat 1 - 1:26:38

So it's,

So, if I can, from my understanding, it's guidance rather than statute.

Seat 24 - 1:26:47

Seat 22 - 1:26:49

For me, that says as anybody can apply for any licence, any time, day before the event.

If that's what you're happy with, then fine. Feels a bit unusual.

Seat 1 - 1:27:02

Seat 22 - 1:27:07

We have got our answer. Would you continue with your...

So I am just going to pick up now on public safety as obviously a key point. There has

been a number of conversations around water and water supply. And I acknowledge that we

are now not using the borehole, which I would point out, it is a mute point now, but actually

James Bell has no authority to authorise use of the borehole

because it is in the deeds restricted

to agricultural equestrian

and single house residential purpose.

The deed also states that the water must not be used

for any other purpose.

So it can never or could never have been used.

I just want to make that point.

We've had a number of conversations about water

and water being shipped in.

Can I just ask, I'm a bit confused

as to how much water you have actually contracted.

Because I don't think we actually got an answer to that.

Seat 29 - 1:28:03

30 ,000 litres on first delivery and then subsequent fills of 20 ,000 litres.

These will occur on a daily basis, Thursday, Friday...

So what's the total?

It will be the 80 ,000 or 60 ,000 extra litres,

depending on forecasted attendance seven days before the event,

further to the 30 ,000.

Seat 1 - 1:28:21

So...

...I'm trying to suggest that...

Seat 1 - 1:28:26

Seat 22 - 1:28:26

The published data suggests that a festival of this size and nature, i .e. a camping festival

over four days, particularly in this heat, would need between 100 and 130 ,000 litres.

So I would suggest, if you are mindful to agree this and agree this is a condition,

that you actually dictate how much water should be provided because I think

that's quite different to the number. I would then also like to pick up on fire

safety which is obviously a big issue. We all have the government alarm

basically saying residents, landowners and visitors should not undertake any

activity that could start a fire. So we're all very, very aware of that. I understand

that the fire team were actually not in attendance at the SAG meeting. I'll forgive them for

that because I think they may have had other priorities than sitting on a SAG meeting with

what's happening in the current climate. We have already had a field fire in that festival

location with four fire engines in attendance. And I have taken the time to speak to one

of the fire crew in attendance of that who has expressed a number of concerns.

I'm assuming you all have a copy of the plan with the fire exits.

If not, I have some here for you which would be easy to share.

Have you got these?

the next meeting.

So we will have the next meeting.

It was on the appendix 3, I believe, at the SAG meeting.

So whether or not you have it?

No, we don't have that here.

Right.

But we are not allowed to take evidence. It has not been previously submitted.

Okay. It was on the SAG meeting.

So on this you have the two fire exits one going out through the main gates not south

And one going out across the false way

The cons one of the big concerns ranged by the fire crew is that there is no emergency

Access to the north of the site. The only access is to the south

If there is anything happens in the middle of the site

Where are we going to go?

Seat 28 - 1:30:51

Yeah, may I just jump in there?

Are we referring to a document that

where the concerns of the fire authority are set out?

No, I believe this is.

I've spoken to one of the fire crew

that was in attendance at the fire that

was already in the site.

Seat 1 - 1:31:07

If I could just highlight.

Yeah.

In terms of input, that is what you say is hearsay. There is no official input from the fire service.

I will put it as I was saying then.

Of course.

Seat 22 - 1:31:28

There is no northerly emergency access to the site. There is only southerly emergency access to the site.

If there is a fire in the middle of the site, the attendees cannot exit. There are no provisions for that.

There is also no water at the site for the fire engines.

Fire engines have to travel one and a half miles to the nearest fire hydrant in Long Newton,

travelling along Crudwell Lane, which is the route designated as the emergency access.

So you've got fire engines going to fill up with water on the same route that you are evacuating the people.

In my book that's unacceptable.

I'd also like to highlight the topography of the land.

I don't know if anybody knows that area but it is very flat and open.

There are no natural firebreaks.

There is no provision to put in manual firebreaks.

The prevailing wind blows southwesterly directly across the site and to the Fosse Way, which

is the designated exit route.

The Fosse Way itself is now a tinderbox of dry, overgrown vegetation as well, so you

are exiting down a route that is also potentially on fire.

I would like to suggest to the committee that actually this is a major, major public safety

thing.

There was a conversation about no barbecues, etc., etc.

What is the smoking policy?

Are you allowing people to smoke?

Yes, people are able to smoke.

We will have signage throughout that encourages people to put out their butts carefully and

bins throughout the festival.

We typically attract a crowd, I will say, probably smokes that are average or slightly

higher than average portion compared to day -to -day society, but they're a conscious crowd who

will obey the signs we put up regarding fire safety with confidence.

Okay, public rights of way it's been briefly mentioned it does go right

through the middle of the site and I am led to believe that they will be the

public will be marshalled through the site not sure how I want to be marshalled

but that's a mute point. I am also led to believe that at the SAG meeting there

was a conversation that anyone using the footpath is more than welcome to come

and join the festival for free. I did that getting out on social media and

Facebook. Bit of chaos waiting to happen there. Does that demonstrate a good

care for public safety? I would suggest not. Thinking of public safety, Harris

fencing. I note from the latest plans that the campsite is not secured by

Harris fencing. The campsite is open fields so that is a safety and security

risk for both the attendees as anyone who's camping there might not want

anyone wandering in and out and also for residents because that means that people

have no corralling in and out. Possible cough -saging I would suggest. Toilet

facilities. I don't know if anybody has Googled any of the previous events and any concerns

that might have been erased at them. One of the big ones was toilets. How many toilets

have you got?

Apparently I need to look up the exact number but I have a recollection that it is between

25 and 30 with a significant number of urinals designed to reduce pressure on the actual

stalls and leave them for women and needing them for other purposes.

Published data again suggests that it needs to be a minimum of 35 to 40 cubicles plus

20 male urinals. So if you were to accept this application I suggest you put that as

a condition as well.

Catering. Our colleagues, the applicant stated there were four food vendors on site. Four

more food vendors for 1500 to 2000 people. I like that thinking. That's a bit of a challenge,

isn't it? They are going to be pretty bloody busy food vendors, are they not? If anybody

who is attending, there has been a number of conversations about the food vendors, I

think the quote was being a bit spendy. Obviously expensive. If a member or an attendee needs

to go and find alternative arrangements, there is nothing nearby. They either have to walk

or drive to Tepe or to Malmsbury, both of which are a mile and a half to two miles away.

There is no other facilities for them to buy any food provisions apart from four food vendors

serving 1500 people plus 400 crew, so that's 2000 people.

I might be a bit hungry.

Traffic and road safety, I know that's been mentioned a couple of times.

You asked the question in terms of the narrow lanes.

We had a planning application in our village recently where there was a traffic survey

done so I can tell you exactly how many vehicles use that lane.

We have an average of 40 cars per hour using that lane.

The applicant email states that they're going to have 600 vehicles arriving over a period

of time. Now, if you particularly on the exit today, if you have one has to be out by four

and they're not believing until 10 in the morning, that's about another hundred cars

an hour. Again, you can find published data that says a road of that size can only safely

accommodate 50 to 60 cars per hour. So we will be effectively doubling it.

Point to note as well in the traffic plan which I would like to put out there

that we have been not involved, nobody's had any conversations with this apart

from Jill Highways who's been very good in trying to share information. If you

put the postcode into SatNav or Google Maps from any direction other than from

Easterly it diverts you through it tells you to go through Crudwell. The plan

allegedly is to move everybody through Long Newton so not quite sure how

they're actually going to do that if everybody's SatNav and Google is sending

them another way. There's got to be some very significant signage throughout

Wiltshire as well because we have that situation where the the fossil way is

the boundary, the location is here and that's Gloucester and then Wiltshire is

that side. So you effectively need to be making sure that we've had conversations

with Wiltshire Highways team to make sure the appropriate signage and everything

is in place. I don't know that that's actually happened. I think it's only

Gloucester. In addition you mentioned yourself as well that there's been no

conversations with Parish Council, local business in particular Melcourt which

operate large HGV vehicles. At the SAG meeting this was raised. Mr. Wilde

stated they had discussed plans with mail court. It was pointed out that was

actually not the case. No one had. In a subsequent communication Mr. Wilde

declares I am going to personally double down on this and ensure it's done to the

right level. We are at the point now booking deliveries so the moment is

right to align with them. Fantastic. Not happened and the lady from mail court will be

able to confirm that.

Probably nuisance. There's been a lot of conversations around noise and fridges. I have to say, I

did a quick Google on how much noise comes out of a fridge. 32 to 38, not 43 decibels.

The other interesting thing if you do it is a bedroom at night to prevent sleep loss you

must be less than 30 decibels. So that's slightly different to the data which we've been given.

The distance that were quoted as well are referring to I think they're not direct as

you currently fly distances and as I've said before is flat pooping fields so therefore

or it will be, distance will travel.

And there's not been any comment as to about the base level

because that's the thing that travels

at that particular time of night.

And that's not been discussed at all.

So I think that needs to be understood in some detail.

There was also a comment that, as we know,

we have the enforcement notice served by Wiltshire Council

whilst the festival was at Charlton Park.

But there was the comment that this was nothing to do,

It was a different organisation, nothing to do with the people sitting in front of us here.

If you look at it, I believe you do have it in your pack, it is addressed to Rosario and I can't pronounce the surname Charalambas.

I have an email dated the 20th of July from Mr Corralles over there and it is signed

Jason, Daniel and Rosario. That would well suggest that Rosario is part of this organisation

rather than not, as previously quoted. I would also like to share with you something that

I found on Reddit, which is like a social media platform. This was a month ago and I

I'm going to read it to you.

I am one of the directors of existence.

Thank you for your support.

This year has been a bit tough for us

with an unexpected postponement until September.

But the silver lining is it means

some people will come who might not have been able to make June.

My arc with the festival has gone from paid attendee

early on, then to investor, and now to co -director

of the whole thing.

It's become a huge part of my life's work.

Our big investments this year are in sound. Our new site allows for much greater volume

late at night. It's hard to get a site in the UK where locals are not too near and you

can blast late on. Let me read that to you again. Our new site allows for much greater

volume late at night. It's hard to get a site in the UK where locals are not too

near and you can blast late on." And that's from a festival director has

quoted. I'll let that sink in for a minute. In my book that basically shows the total

lack of respect for any of the others that are around.

We also have the notice from Charlton Park, where the festival was previously, who say,

and I quote, did not renew existence licence for this year due to noise issues during last

year's event. The noise levels caused too much distress to the local community with

whom we tried very hard to keep a good working relationship. We worked closely with the council

and the local community to ensure that events hosted at Charlton Park do not cause excessive

disruption to the surrounding area.

We have that in our report back there. If I can ask you to slowly wind up, have the

respect for the other speakers.

Protection of children. The festival site is actually adjacent to Baldrige Farm, which

has children's nursery from the age of two. This is an 18 plus festival, so I want to

let alone the noise. There are clearly defined levels of decibels that young children should

be subjected to, which are much less than what they're declaring for their daily level.

The wooded area adjacent to the site, right in your map at the right of the beginning

here is designated as the Nursery Forest School. There is also a preschool in Crudwell and

I believe that head has also submitted her own objection. I would like to suggest this

application actually does not offer appropriate protection for children. Music from 10am on

Thursday and all of Friday is not appropriate. And finally, I'm going to wrap up now. I think

we've got an issue here of credibility, integrity and competence. Whilst acknowledged, this

is not a defined area. I believe it is fundamental to any decision that you make as a committee.

We heard from Rebecca saying last one was subject to approval and safeguards being in

place. There was a meeting held with the event organisers on the 2nd of June after much doing

and throwing to actually get it. They had none of the organisations in place. We sat

at that meeting assuming they would come with a traffic plan and an event manager plan,

There was nothing so there were no safeguards in place

unfortunately

The local parishes have tried to contact them there's been nothing we have a reasonable expectation that we would have you

contacted for this

application there has been nothing and

Would also like to comment that the designated premises supervisor has it really just been granted his licence

So, whilst everyone has to start somewhere, I would suggest starting on a festival in

a rural location. It's not been a site approved before. It's probably not the appropriate

site for a person who's literally just got his licence.

Again, I've had an email from them saying that they are committed to working constructively

with the parishes and local interested parties. Not had anything, so I think that's words

again. Once again just words no contact to myself, no contact to Nikki Ind, the

local councillor, no contact to local businesses. We sit here today and no

doubt we will be told again that they're going to put all of these safeguards in

place. I would also like to point out on the 23rd of July on their Facebook page

they declared existence festival is on in capital letters this September. We are

100 % confirmed. Now, unless there's something I don't, I don't think there are yet.

I guess as elected representatives, you have the same as me, you have a responsibility

to the community. There are major issues with public safety, it's a public nuisance, it

doesn't protect children from harm. The site itself is rural lane, it doesn't have the

infrastructure to hold a 2000 attendee festival. Now, the applicant will respond and say they'll

sought it, but can you trust that this applicant is credible and has public safety at the forefront?

Let me remind you, this is an applicant who has publicly stated they are 100 % confirmed

when they're not. This is the applicant who is going to personally double down on speaking

with local businesses and hasn't. This is the applicant who stated at the last hearing

there were nothing to do with Charlton Park Festival, yet I've proven to you that they

are. This is the applicant who publicly stated our new site allows for much greater volume

late at night. I strongly suggest the evidence before you would show that you cannot and

must not accept this application and must refuse it. Please don't make the same mistake

as your previous forebears who basically took the information provided to them in good faith.

I have proven to you, I have evidence that suggests that that was not actually the case.

Thank you.

Seat 1 - 1:47:29

Thank you very much. Looking at the clock, for all participants here, I'm going to have a five -minute comfort break at four o 'clock.

If you can manage ten minutes.

I won't do this as long as it's ten o 'clock, you have no idea.

Thank you very much indeed.

If you could state your name and then please go straight away.

Seat 22 - 1:47:58

Thanks. I'm Trevor Jones. I'm the chair of the Ashley Parish meeting.

And you realise that Ashley is the village, the village of Ashley is the closest to the site.

Let me start by setting out the parish position.

In the UK, we believe the festival will cause significant public nuisance, it will risk

public safety and it does not protect children from harm.

In addition, we believe that it breaches the recent very clear guidance that landowners

should not organise any events which could cause fire.

I suspect that people in Stourbridge, sort of four weeks ago, wouldn't be too worried

about the effect of the little minor fires, but 17 families are homeless as a direct consequence

of fires in rural areas.

What I'd like to do now is run fairly quickly through some points where I think you may

wish to add conditions to any licence you may grant. We are hoping you refuse the licence,

but if you feel that respondents have got it wrong and there isn't adverse impact on

the festival, I'd ask you to consider these following points.

Starting with public nuisance and noise, I do want to pick up noise and I'm not a national

expert, I haven't set any national targets for noise, but I do understand what an average

is. Average noise from a fridge, if it was a 15 -minute period, you would expect based

on simple averages that for seven and a half minutes the noise would exceed the level of

the fridge, because that's how you get averages. When I sleep in bed from midnight to two o 'clock

in the morning, I wouldn't be disturbed by having a fridge in the garden for that period.

However, I am disturbed if my dog barks twice. If the dog barks, I wake up. Average noise

distorts the impact of intervals of very loud noise. All of us around here, I suspect, have

heard the festivals at Walmart, heard the festivals on Charlton Park. I suspect a lot

of people have been disturbed by the noise from there, even though it was equivalent

to the level of a fridge. So we are concerned about the level of noise, and I'm very pleased

that at the June hearing, and Rebecca, when she made an introduction, refers to the June

hearing. At the June hearing, the committee recognised the significance of noise nuisance

and actually changed the proposal and the application to reduce it from closing at 4am

and reduce it to 2am. Our parish meeting believes that 2am is still too late. Anything after

sleep, even though it may average at a level of a fridge.

We would ask you to consider as a condition to the licence that the closure time for music

is no later than midnight.

2am is too late.

If I move on to traffic issues, I won't go into detail because I think that has covered

that, but we confirm concern that the local roads can't pull with the amount of traffic

that will be generated. On public safety, we also share concerns about emergency vehicle

access. What we would like the committee to investigate is whether the emergency services

have confirmed that their response times, both to people on the festival site and to

people in their residence, whether those response times will be adversely affected by the traffic

confusion on Crudwell Lane. We believe it will. We believe response times will get worse

as a direct consequence of using that site for the festival.

The most critical issue I think for people in the Ashley Parish is the issue of water.

I may be surprising with this point, but I want to agree with the position now that the

applicant is taking, which I'll come onto in a second.

But I think the committee needs to be aware that Ashley Village has no mains water supply.

No mains water supply.

Twelve of the properties rely on the borehole at Ashley Marsh.

And that borehole is renowned for the fact it can't cope with increases in demand.

Over the last few weeks when we've had the hot weather, there have been at least four

occasions when those 12 properties have had no water.

No water for drinking, no water for sanitation.

To suddenly add 2 ,000 extra people drinking water associated with that borehole, the water

supply will definitely fail.

But the good news is that at the last hearing, Daniel cabled a paper in advance of the meeting.

And in that paper, he gave an undertaking that once I think he understood the concerns we had with the borehole,

that water would be supplied independently by tanker, quoting from his paper,

placing no reliance on the shared borehole supply whatsoever.

The applicant, and now Daniel is the applicant, is willing to have this commitment embedded as an enforceable condition of the licence.

Rebecca, in her introductions, suggested they would like a condition.

Ashley Parish meeting supports absolutely that recommendation.

that there is a condition attached to the licence preventing the use of the Ashley Marsh

Borehole. Absolutely. I think, because we are pushed for time, I'll close at this point.

Apart from raising the issue of fire, I talked about Stourbridge and we all saw how quickly

the fire spread. Seventeen houses burned to the ground. I personally don't think it's

adequate to have some fire extinguishers dotted round the site if you had a fire burning across

the fields around Ashley and Long Newton. The nearest property is about 100 yards, 100

metres from the festival site. That would be the first place to follow Ashley Marsh.

Just by chance, that farm also possesses a significant number of horses. Horses would

be gone. Then within less than half a mile, you come to Ashley Village. There are no barriers

between the site and Ashley Village, Ashley Village is to the north. So I would again

ask the committee to satisfy itself, that's permissible under the terms of the government

guidance to hold an event that provides a fire risk in the local area. That's all I

say at this point. My other point I think would be covered by the people.

Seat 1 - 1:56:14

Thank you very much Trevor.

It is now four o 'clock, after the, let's call it 10 minutes

so we can get a cup of coffee or something.

After that I will invite Councillor Inge

and the representatives of Mr. yeah.

Seat 1 - 1:56:39

I'm going to take 10 minutes break and then you can be next up.

I'm sorry, I don't hear you without the microphone.

He's Crudwell Parrot.

Seat 1 - 1:57:15

10 past four, everybody.

Thank you.

Seat 1 - 1:57:49

public speaking.

to parish councils left and

then I'm going to go to

Council at end. I again, I

would remind you have set the

limit one hour for public

speaking. Which is 25 minutes.

that the applicants had so that you are getting longer. Again, I remind you

please don't repeat what's already been said. It doesn't add any more weight to the

case. So please keep it brief if you can and if you would

Seat 1 - 1:58:29

Seat 22 - 1:58:33

introduce yourself and start your speech and remember there's 35 minutes left.

Thank you, Chair. My name is Chuck Berry. I'm the Wiltshire Council Member for the

division which includes Crudwell. I did engage with traffic officers today and

earlier on in the week and received an email basically saying as follows I've

checked this is from the traffic officer I've checked and I've received no

information about the existence festival Dave the director did receive a traffic

management plan but as they are not intending to have any festival traffic

on our roads there was nothing more we can do. I have also emailed Bob Eccleston

to see if he's been made aware of anything that would impact the

network but as yet they have not received a response. So that's interesting

from that perspective and listening to what was said previously I've got a

couple of casual observations to make. The first one is if there's a track you

really fancy and you hear it playing just in the distance, you're going to have to say

to your wife, could we turn off the fridge please because I can't quite make it out.

And that's what I don't quite understand.

But there are lots of scientific methods with constructive and destructive interference

that can be used to manage sound.

And that's something that we as members of the public aren't going to understand.

Whereas people in the scientific world will understand that.

and I think it's really important to remember that going forwards.

And the commitment that's being made and suggested for conditions, I think, is a really interesting

one going forwards.

However, the issue we have right now is that government is clearly very nervous about further

fires and has asked us as members of the public not to put other members of the public in

danger in future.

And I know we've made that very clear to this point.

and I just really worry about a sort of a she'll be right attitude because it

just doesn't strike me that you as an organisation are absolutely committed to

safety and dotting the I's and crossing the T's and that's why you never made it

for June. So what can I say? The things that were brought up by Fi, which was

fantastic by the way, die sorry, was fantastic by the way, it's very clear

that this is just a sort of a cobbled together thing, last minute, hence not paying any attention

to the limitations in terms of requirement for licence applications. And I would suggest

members of the committee that you really shouldn't take that risk. You shouldn't take that risk

with people's lives. You shouldn't take that risk with the popularity associated with it.

And I'm here to talk for my residents because they are absolutely scared that their lives

during those few days will be ruined. There are many of them that live up that way and

there are some who live so close. It's unbelievable, and if you've driven there, you'll know.

The lady who sells the eggs right at the end was here earlier, and

you will have seen that if you've been up there. I went up there. I drove up there.

I also drove up to the next door place with a big pond and the big construction element

that's there, and I made a comment about that in my written

submission. It's just not the right place.

I totally understand that a farmer wants to make a few quid, but not at the expense of people who live in the country's lives,

and indeed the countryside, if something catches fire.

And it would be down to you if you grant it. Thank you very much.

Seat 1 - 2:02:08

Thank you very much indeed. I'm going to go across now, sir, if you would like to come forward.

Seat 1 - 2:02:32

Seat 22 - 2:02:42

Thank you. If you would like to state your name and start with your speaking.

Thank you, Chair. I'll be brief. I'm speaking as the Chairman of Cropmore Parish Council.

Our parish is directly abutting the festival site by the cross way, and we have residents

in that area. The rest of the village is some 1 ,500 metres away. I also bring, I think,

some relevant professional experience as a previous programme director of the Department

of Health in the Public Health Division.

And a major part of my role was to ensure

that all perceived risks were properly considered

and mitigation plans were realistic, robust,

and effective.

I see lots of risks here and not much mitigation.

I'll bear with your patience again

and give you a recent incidence of a fire in our village,

which was a field fire, which was very well dealt with.

And the fire threatened a number of homes

that is very quickly extinguished by local farmers

who came to the scene with tractors and equipment

to plough firebreaks and to support firefighting efforts.

They were able to act effectively

because they recognised the risk.

They had a plan to work together.

They had clear roads and easy access to the site.

That level of access, organisation and preparedness cannot be assumed at the proposed venue, particularly

with 2 ,000 visitors, vehicles, event staging, stalls and associated infrastructure on site.

And that's why my residents are so concerned, as Chuck says.

The Craggle Parish Council is not opposed to festivals in principle.

However, such events should take place only in suitable, well -managed venues that provide

safe access for emergency services, adequate on -site facilities and appropriate safeguards

for visitors, residents and the wider community.

We believe the proposed venue is unsuitable for this purpose.

At the event we are allowed to proceed, it would create serious risks, including undue

nuisance to residents, compromised public safety for both residents and the festival

goers and potential public health concerns for attendees.

We promised consultation by the organisers.

This has not taken place.

On the one occasion when the organisers attended the parish council meeting, we made clear

that Leiden music after midnight is not appropriate in a rural area.

We also stated that Cradwell Lane is completely unsuitable and unsafe for the proposed volume

of traffic and their alternative routes should be used.

There are no viable alternative routes.

It has already been pointed out.

These requests have been paid to the Lord.

We as Credwell Parish Council and other venues have no confidence in the ability of this

company to organise a safe festival at this site.

For these reasons, Credwell Parish Council respectfully requests that ISOC applications

be refused.

Seat 1 - 2:05:54

Seat 3 - 2:05:59

Thank you, Chair. Thank you very much, Inji. I'm so sorry, I'm making notes. What was your name? I do

Seat 22 - 2:06:02

Seat 1 - 2:06:07

apologise. Thank you so much. Thank you. I'm going to first council end and then to the

representative from the farm.

Seat 22 - 2:06:16

Thank you colleagues for the opportunity to speak this afternoon along with my

parish council colleagues, residents and businesses regarding this licencing application.

Firstly, I'd like to reiterate that what I said in the previous licencing hearing regarding this site,

I'm not against music festivals, we all enjoy them. However, they do need to be in the right

place with the right facilities and the right protections for the attendees and local residents.

That's human and animal who have to live with this event before, during and afterwards. It is

Important to put this site and the effect that this will have on our community into context. I am the ward Councillor

representing Ashley with Colton Long Newton and

Tepry and ship to Moine so two of my parishes are within my ward and I will try not to repeat

Other items that my colleagues have brought up. I will try and highlight some other parts

One of the big things I don't think it's come up yet is about the highways

So the festival site is accessed along a single lane track which comes from a single lane

Connecting Long Newton to Credwell. I drove it on Monday afternoon

about just before four o 'clock

Very few passing places. I came from the Credwell direction as you would if you'd put your sat -nav on

Where you can pass lots of very deep

deep potholes, so I nearly bottomed my car at one point

and then went to the Fosse Way to have a look at the emergency exit and then I

got just past Mile Court and I encountered one of their HGVs coming

towards me. That was just on a Monday afternoon at 10 to 4. It's a busy little

lane. It's been, as colleagues have said, it's been subject to extensive traffic

movements and actually movements on that lane are not only cars but farm vehicles

and HGBs, pedestrians, dog walkers, cyclists and horse riders. That lane is

therefore unable to safely accommodate the additional traffic that will be

generated by this event. This site is unsustainable. It has no footpaths, no

street lights and no public transport. I understand that there are 20 to 30 HGBs

that access the Melcourt site and I understand one of my colleagues from

Melcourt will be represented from Melcourt will be making

representations as well this afternoon and it was indicated by the applicants

that the peak hours were from 11 a .m. to 7 p .m. I think you'll find that the

Melcourt HGVs start first thing in the morning and go right through the day and

they work six days a week so 20 to 30 HGVs. The other thing on this lane to

remember is somebody talked about a one -way system that's not possible on

that lane because Melcourt HGVs have to access Crudwell Lane from Church Lane in

Newton and they are not allowed to go on to Credwell. They have to turn back on

themselves and go back up to Church Lane. So one -way system definitely doesn't

work. I'm also concerned about the Fosse Way. I had a walk down to the emergency

double gates. I just don't think, I know it's a byway, but I'm not sure that it

is actually, I'm not convinced that it's appropriate or safe. I do question

whether a fire engine will be able to turn into the field at that point. Also

whether an ambulance could drive safely across that field which is just a stubble field currently

and that field of course has been mentioned the site was recently had a field fire. Now this is

a real threat as colleagues and other representatives have said following Friday night's national severe

alert. Most of those alerts are saying residents landowners and visitors should not undertake any

activity that could start a fire. No cigarettes. I'm sure within those 2 ,000

people event organisers, staff and attendees will be smoking. Matches,

smoking, glass bottles, litter, mirrors or reflective objects. And one that really

struck me, no parking of vehicles on dry grass as hot exhausts and catalytic

converters can start fires. What I'd like to really understand is have the fire

service I understand from what Di said that they weren't able to do at the SAG

meeting understandably given the current situation but have the fire service been

contacted and commented on this since the raising of the fire threat nationally

and you know so I'm just concerned one way in one way so say is an emergency

access out onto a byway no North access have the fire service since that alert

that has been raised by the government.

Have they made any comment at all?

Have they been approached?

I'm really concerned about the safety

and the public liability insurance.

Has that been, maybe that's been provided,

but has that been provided to us so that,

I really hope not, but should a wildfire start

and properties be destroyed,

we need to know that the festival has enough cover for that.

It's it's it's a real concern. The potential the likely effects on the highway itself are that vehicles including large vehicles, HGVs, pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, all on that single lane track.

We're just it's just due to the volume of traffic and all attendees will have to go by vehicle to the site because there's no public transport.

It's just not built to deal with that sort of traffic

There's a potential for delayed evacuation of the site or access for emergency services

And I'm trying to lose some of the bits that have already been said minimal parking spaces

I'm really concerned about this water supply. I'm really pleased don't get me wrong

I'm over the moon that they're not going to use the borehole because that was one of my points but

What size are these vehicles bringing in 30 ,000 20 ,000 litres? How big are these HGB?

what time of day are they coming in? And also I still can't work out how 2 ,000

people with four food trucks, how that's going to work. Without a doubt people

will be leaving that site in their cars to visit Tettbury or Malmsbury. You only

have to go into a supermarket in Malmsbury when Charlton Park is going

and you can tell the festival go is there because they've come off site and

they're in the supermarket getting that be. So it's a public safety. It's

pedestrians, cyclists, all that safety on a rural single -track lane is

really the one thing that over a lots of other bits that coming out. We're

in the CNL, the Cotswolds National Landscape, the public Right -of -way. We

need to be able to have lawful and safe access as residents to that Right -of -

Way and we shouldn't be limited at all. The

NAS4, as we said, goes right across the front there,

and no rerouting has been sought as it was outlined.

Really pleased that the water borehole sorted out.

One thing, I attended the meeting in June

prior to the meeting that was cancelled,

where we met with one of the gentlemen over here,

and as outlined by other colleagues,

we felt that we didn't have the information there,

and it was only a few days away at that point.

I was disappointed actually, because there was an assurance

that there would be communication this time

and they would work with us,

but that has not been forthcoming,

which is really disappointing as a community.

But one of the things that really got me there

was we talked about safeguarding

and we talked about what would happen

if you've got, for example, a vulnerable lone woman,

how would somebody be supported in that situation?

And the previous plans included placing people to be removed into a minibus, transporting

them to a 24 -hour garage in stride and leaving them there.

Not sure how responsible that is.

So I'm really concerned that we could have crime on site with police 10 miles away.

We could have it spilling out into the village, people leaving, people turning up and thinking

they can get in.

We're told that there's no day tickets, but actually it sounded like there are day tickets.

available for Saturday and Sunday. Potentially, are they really going to

take intoxicated venerable people 10 miles, drop them off, leave them to their

own devices in a time they don't know? Are the real, I would really like to know

what safeguards are in place for those people? And one of the questions is

can you confirm that? Because that was something that had come up. The only other

thing to say is that I think public nuisance I think talked about a lot lot

of this we've talked about the wedding which is taking place which I know is

not a licencing consideration but it is a public nuisance to the village and to

the to the family I know that the the organisers have been dealing with the

family and they have requested the details of the insurance should there be

a situation I don't believe that they're sufficient cover they don't believe that

sufficient cover should there be an incident. And in early September you would expect families and

children to be using their gardens and windows open probably with the weather as it is. This

is obviously not what we've been used to before but I think this is the new norm. So I think do we

you know we've got a site which is no public transport. It can't you know it's got no

water. It's all got to be brought in on HGVs on a single track lane, a single

track lane where residents are using it day in day out. So you've got cars, motor

homes, lorries, HGVs, everything to support the site. I would be interested to have

the 24 -hour number please to ring up with the noise complaints when I'm being

called in the middle of the night should it be approved. This site is just not

sustainable, no pavement, no street lighting, no vehicle, you know, you've got to drive a

vehicle to get there, no public transport, so attendees, stallholders,

campsite services, HGVs every day bringing water, is it enough water? The

fire risk is a real concern for me and I suppose I'm reiterating I understand

that the applicants, I believe that the applicants are the same people, the same

applicants that organised the event that was experienced by our neighbours in Wiltshire last year.

And so I really, and they were also involved in the event that was cancelled in June,

and which I attended that meeting where nothing could be provided to us on the 2nd of June.

And I think it was meant to start on about the 4th or 5th, something like that.

So I'm just, I just don't feel confident that this is, I know it's not the right site,

because it doesn't have the right facilities. It's open, rural, agricultural land.

It's stubble fields at the moment. It's bone -tender dry.

Seat 1 - 2:17:24

And I think that's all I can add to everything my colleagues said. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor. Sir, if you could come forward.

Seat 22 - 2:17:36

If you could give us your name and then commence speaking.

Sir, I'm very conscious of time, but I hope you would give me a little bit of time, because

I've come all the way down from Cheshire this morning to represent my client. So I hope

you would just bear with me a little bit and give me an element of grace. My name is David

Roberts. I'm a solicitor from Knights, and I represent both Judy Pratt and also Matthias

and Charlotte Blumman who are the owners of Ashdie Marsh farm. Councillors I have

shared with the applicants just some plans, some photographs. I just wonder

whether I can pass these forward to you. It's just showing the current state of

the land at the moment. Kevin? If the applicants or parties are in agreement

then you have the choice as to whether it's included but you must first consult.

If the applicants are in agreement, I will accept them.

I'm not proposing to refer to them in the greater detail.

Councillor George, can you just have a look?

Councillors, if I may just, shall I crack on?

Yeah, please, go ahead.

Councillors, it's a bit of a strange one in the fact that I'm representing both

Judy Pratt and also Matthias and Charlotte Lungman. When this application

was made Judy Pratt was in the process of selling Ashley Marsh Farm and on the

7th of August Mr. and Mrs. Lungman actually completed their purchase of the farm.

Now Councillors, I think it's really really important, my friend mentioned

this morning what's changed since the previous application. Well a number of

things have happened since the last application in June but one is the fact

that Ashley Marsh Farm is in the process of being occupied again.

Councillors if you look to the supplementary bundle at page two you'll see the plan

which shows my client's proximity to the proposed festival site. It's page three in your bundle.

Apologies. Councillors, now the Ashy Marsh Farm is much bigger than this, but it is bang

on the boundary between the festival site and as you can see, my clients have got barns

here, which are in the process of moving some very, very

expensive horses.

They're Olympic competing, international competing

dressage horses.

My client is, unfortunately Matthias

couldn't be with us today because he'd actually already

got a holiday booked.

So he is actually on Zoom watching this from Italy.

But he is in the process of actually moving

into the premises and will be in occupation by the date

of the proposed festival.

Councillors, you will note from the festival site that the barns where the horses are going

to be located in is in the region of about 50 metres from the nearest corner of that

field. You will also notice that not only is the livery field to the right, but the

house in which Mr. Lungman and his family are going to be living is about 350 metres

from the festival site. Now since the application made in June, it actually appears from the

applicant's plan that actually they've increased the number of stages where they're going to be

having entertainment, was previously three. And now it will be four, one in each corner of each

of these fields. Now as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Lungman, he's seriously concerned about the

proposals here in terms of the festival and the impact of noise. Now councillors, we've talked

a lot about decibels and noise levels.

What we haven't seen is we haven't seen the noise

management plan.

There's been a lot of details that you have not

been privy to in this application,

and neither have we.

That was the same case in June.

Now the applicant has been very selective with the information

that they provided with you.

And we would suggest that has been suggested already

that their track record in relation

to the events that have been held at Cholton Park Farm

and their failure to have their ducks in a row for the June

event is just further indication of the fact that this team is really

struggling to organise festivals safely and are under a lot of pressure.

Councillors, we are very very concerned about the impact not just to the family

but also to those horses and we're entitled to have a free enjoyment of our

own land. Now Councillors, a lot has been said about the borehole. I'm not going to

a part manager of that borehole and I was going to suggest a little bit more information about that.

What he's really seriously concerned about is the impacts of fire.

Really, really serious. In fact, I spoke to him about an hour before the hearing started and he said,

there's not many things that keep me awake,

but I am seriously kept being kept awake. If this event goes ahead in terms of the risk of fire, it is substantial.

Now, Ashty Marsh Farm is right on the boundary. You'll see from this plan, Councillors,

that there's quite a lot of untended wooded area. I've walked the site this morning. I walked the

site in May when the first herring took place and the difference in the land is considerable.

The wood, the vegetation is so arid. It is really quite concerning. Obviously we've heard already

that the neighbouring fields caught on fire just a few weeks ago and that is a serious concern

because not only is it the concern to the vestibule site but it's how fast and

how rapid that fire would spread and obviously with the farm to the right

Ashty Marsh Farm and the wooded areas we're really concerned about that

igniting. You'll see in the photographs how dry that that land is. Councillors

not only that but also this area here is quite open and what is not clear from

applicant is where their boundary is. I think that it's quite an open boundary

here so again we don't know who could go into these woods because we haven't got

control over who may be camping on these sites. So Council it's a really serious

concern, serious serious concern. In respect of the the the fire exit

provision, also I noticed that the intention is for the secondary fire exit

to be on an area just off the Fosse Way. Now the Fosse Way this morning again

when I drove down it is not, I have a four -wheel drive Volvo and that was not,

I was not going to drive that down the Fosse Way to see where the emergency

exit gets to. If fire engines are having to use that as an emergency route I

suspect they wouldn't get through. This site is totally, totally, totally unsuitable

for this proposed activity.

And being in this proximity, Mr. Lungman

is seriously, seriously concerned about it.

The impact on noise, the impact on the risk of fire,

it's just absolutely, it could be absolutely catastrophic.

And I don't say that likely.

This is a real, real serious concern in relation to this.

And that is what has changed here.

Now, my friend might say, well, the fire authority didn't object to this application when it

was submitted. Well, there's two reasons probably why. One, because the weather conditions when

this application was made two months ago were only just starting to be as dry as they are

now. We're in a much worse state than we were two months ago. Secondly, the fire authority

since 2005 actually, as you'll probably be aware, has a tendency not to make objections

to licencing applications because the obligation is on the operator under the

RRO regulations to ensure that they have the appropriate measures in place. Now

you've heard from the applicant well we've got fire risk assessment here

we're gonna have fire extinguishers dotted around. Counsellors it doesn't need

me to spell out to you the risks here of an event where there's going to be

generators, there's going to be food bans, there's going to be people smoking, just

casually, it is easy for fire to start and I don't need to labour that point. The

demonstration has been the fact that it's already happened in that locality.

In respect of noise and nuisance counsellors, as I said, we've spoken an

awful lot about decibels but also we're talking about public nuisance. The right

of somebody to enjoy their property or their business uninterrupted. There will

be inevitable interruption on the family living at Ashley Marsh farm. There'll be

concern about their livestock. There will be concern about noise and the patterns and

waves are not just the volume, it's also the frequency and the vibrations that are likely

to be caused across that site as a consequence of this festival. There's not been much talk

here about noise and vibration and frequency. It's all been about decibels and fridges.

The fact that there is a telephone number for residents to phone, well, great, but we'd

hope that that isn't even in question of having to be used, because if it is, it's a nuisance

in itself to have to make a phone call at three o 'clock in the morning to ask the neighbours

to turn their noise down. Councillors, this is just totally the wrong site, totally the

site. And you are entitled to consider this application. If you bear with me a moment,

sir. I've also been asked to just raise one point as well, councillors, that obviously

in the context, I think everybody has Stourbridge quite firmly on their mind and the rapid spread

of fire. The Fosse Way is in direct line connexion up to Cotswolds Airport and there's great

concern that if that area was to catch fire, as it could do from the site, then that fire

could spread up north as well. So we're not just talking about the movement of fire north,

but we're talking about northeast as well. This is a massive, massive area. Very, very

dry, arid area. Also to the north of the site, I'm also told that there is an unmanaged woodland

area that leads straight up to Ashley, the village of Ashley as well. And again, that could be potentially at risk.

Councillors, I don't propose to Labour too much because I think I've probably covered all the points.

I don't know whether there's any additional questions that I can address.

Can I remind you once again, switch off your mobile phones, thank you.

At the moment, Councillors have questions. Oh, sorry. Yes, there was one additional question

that I have actually got. One of the concerns that Mr. Lundberg has raised in relation to

the fire provision is in respect of the indemnity insurance that is held by the festival. Given

the potential for risk, I understand that the limit on the liability insurance is set

at 10 million pound. Now, given the event space and the potential damage on the event

space alone, given the fact that the value of Ashleigh Marsh Farm is probably in the

region of about 7 million pounds on its own, and given the number of properties in Ashley

Village, then that to us does not seem anywhere near enough. Now obviously we have no power

to interfere with that limit of liability, but given the levels of risk and the particular

circumstances we just say that that's not that that is insufficient.

Seat 3 - 2:30:10

Seat 22 - 2:30:15

Thank you. Is that seven million including those horses? The insurance

Seat 3 - 2:30:25

will be held by... Sorry, the seven million of that the value of the farm is

including the horses?

Seat 22 - 2:30:28

That would be out.

And the house is sold for 6 and 1 .5 million pounds.

The horses are considerably more.

The business that Mr. Lungman is setting up

is a stud farm and international level question training centre.

Seat 9 - 2:30:47

Can I just ask about those horses?

Could they not be moved somewhere else?

Seat 22 - 2:30:56

and the charge picked up.

Seat 9 - 2:30:58

So how much would it cost to rehome

Seat 22 - 2:31:02

the horses for four days?

So I can't answer that question because Mr.

Lundberg isn't here.

What I do know is that the level of horses that they are,

that they are very, these are elite horses.

It's not a case of just putting them in the stable

down the road.

it would have to be appropriate accommodation.

I don't know.

That is not something that has been raised with us

by the applicant.

The app...

Seat 22 - 2:31:33

The applicant's only made any attempt to make contact

with my clients at 8 o 'clock on Monday night.

So when I spoke to him yesterday in relation to proposals,

I've not heard anything since.

So it's, again, vagueness of consultation with others.

Seat 1 - 2:31:56

The horses are there today.

No, sir, they're not, but they will be before the event.

Mr. Lundberg completed the sale on purchase

on the 7th of August.

He's currently on holiday, but on his return from holiday,

Seat 1 - 2:32:13

the move is taking place.

Thank you.

At this point I am going to ask the applicant or their representatives if they have any

questions.

Seat 28 - 2:32:23

Seat 1 - 2:32:29

No, thank you chair, no questions. I might deal with a few matters in my summing up if

that is all right.

Thank you very much indeed.

Seat 1 - 2:32:39

I'm aware we've got at least one more speaker or two more speakers, but the time is running,

so thank you very much indeed. Could I ask the representative of Calcott to come forward?

And so I'll try and get you in this if I can.

Seat 22 - 2:33:03

Thank you, Councillors.

My name is Nikki Burton.

I am the managing director of Melcorp Industries.

As you know, a few members within this room have already mentioned Melcorp.

Melcorp operates an active manufacturing and distribution business close

to the proposed festival site.

Our operations include regular HD movements, as already noted, mobile plant,

loading operations, and industrial machinery.

I'm going to try and cut through this as quick as I can.

I've taken loads out.

Melcourt has engaged constructively throughout.

We have attended licencing hearings, participated in stakeholder meetings,

and devoted considerable management time to understanding the proposals

and their impact on our own business.

I acknowledge that the plans have developed since the previous application.

However, having reviewed information, several practical matters continue to concern us.

The first being traffic and access, which I'm going to try not to go into too much detail

because I know you have information, but their latest traffic management plan,

which I'd like to add I have not seen and I have had no communication

with the festival organisers, bearing in mind we are seven

to 10 days away from them setting this event up,

which could have a huge impact on my business.

So secondly to that, the traffic management plan,

as I have been made aware,

anticipates approximately 380 to 570 vehicles

using an approach which it acknowledged

is effectively single lane in places.

The revised site plan, which we've all seen,

provides internal holding capacity for over 200 vehicles,

not the 1000 stated today.

However, it then states that it gives confidence

there will never be a backup onto Crudwell Lane.

As a business that regularly operates HDVs on these roads,

I would like to understand what evidence supports

that degree of certainty and what happens

if actual arrival patterns different

from those anticipated.

More importantly for Mall Court,

the traffic management plan specifically states in there

that the organisers will work with Mall Court

to coordinate infrastructure deliveries

and that the detailed articulated HDV delivery

schedule is still to be confirmed.

That coordination has not taken place with us,

nor have we seen this plan.

We therefore find ourselves specifically named

within a traffic management plan as part

of an arrangement which has not actually been agreed with us.

It is also our understanding that no other neighbouring

business in close proximity, including Church Farm

and its businesses, sibling motor engineering and so on,

have not been contacted regarding the traffic management plan

or how access to their premises will be maintained.

This is particularly concerning as I've said, we are seven to 10 days away,

I assume, from a setup happening.

Now from previous experience and from meetings that were attended and discussed,

we discovered at the last one when the event was so say postponed,

how are Svens and Lorries turned up?

Unexpected, we were not made aware.

Again, this does not deliver on their promise.

And I think this needs to be taken seriously.

There's also a known conflict,

which the village is aware of, and our parish is aware of.

We have new offices being installed,

which commences on Monday the 7th of September,

immediately following the festival.

This will involve additional contractor

and vehicle movements to our premises

at the same time that the festival attendees

and event traffic are expected to be leaving

and breakdown activity commences.

Have the organisers engaged with us

as their own traffic management plan says

they would have understood the foreseeable conflict

that could have been identified and coordinated in advance.

Our concern is therefore not theoretical.

The traffic management plan relies upon coordination

with Malcorp, which has not happened

Despite site field build being imminent and a known operational conflict

This brings me on to

Security again for the event. We have been made aware that that site is not going to be completely Harris fenced off

Which brings concerns to myself?

We are an open site. We have machinery we have operations throughout the day and

and we have staff on site. My concern is that site is not secure. How am I guaranteed that

the prevention of crime and disorder will be maintained if that site is not secure?

And that's all I'm going to say on that matter. I know it's been mentioned before. Again,

fire safety has been brought up a number of times. I'm not going to repeat what's been

said. But what I will say to you is Melcourt is a business that, I'm just

gonna get to my notes. So Melcourt, we store substantial volumes of bark and

other combustible materials. Now the fire that was mentioned back in July that

happened, I was on site at the time and I personally witnessed embers coming over

based on the direction of the wind. Now you tell me how that can operate safely

bearing in mind you have camper vans, okay they're going to monitor that and

say that there's they're not going to allow gas, they're not going to allow camper vans.

That fire risk is serious and I want to understand how their current plan takes

into factor all of this. It's a huge concern for us. This concern is heightened

by the recent official warnings around extreme heating conditions. The Met

The office outlook covering the period approach in the festival indicates that rainfall is more likely to be below average with furthest earls of hot weather.

And potentially another heat wave.

My point is simply that the fire risk assessment and emergency arrangements need to reflect the actual conditions likely to exist on this particular site when the event takes place.

As we all know, Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue did not attend that SAG meeting.

I just need to understand that this has been reviewed by the fire and whether

their risk assessment, their emergency access and evacuation arrangements cover

for this. The applicant's major incident plan addresses hot weather, high winds,

wet weather and electrical storms. Given the recent fire and the current dry

condition of the land, I would also like confirmation that the increased risk of

grass or vegetation fire during prolonged dry conditions has been

specifically assessed and that there is an appropriate response plan should such

a fire occur. These are not general objections to camping or camper vans by

the way. They are questions about whether the combination of dry land, potential

ignition sources, emergency access and combustible materials on an immediately

neighbouring industrial site has been adequately considered from a public

safety perspective. For Melcourt the remaining concerns are very practical.

The traffic management plan expressively relies upon coordination with our business,

yet with the site build potentially beginning imminently, the coordination is still not happened.

Other neighbouring businesses are also affected by not receiving this plan.

The campsite will not be physically enclosed by Harris fencing, yet Melcourt and other neighbouring

businesses have had no engagement regarding how attendees leaving the controlled event will be

managed. And from a public safety perspective, there remain legitimate questions regarding the

of fire and emergency arrangements on currently dry land. I'm coming to the end

by the way. This ultimately brings us to the question of confidence in delivery.

We acknowledge that the applicant has provided plans and assurances about how

the event will operate. However, with the proposed build now imminent, some of the

practical arrangements described within those plans have still not taken place.

We would therefore ask the subcommittee whether it has sufficient confidence

based on the evidence before it today.

That these plans will not simply exist on paper,

but will actually be implemented

and delivered effectively on the ground.

That's particularly important given our direct experience

of the previously proposed event,

where significant operational matters remain unresolved,

very close to the event date.

We're not asking for a guarantee that nothing will go wrong.

We are asking whether the committee has sufficient evidence

today, rather than assurances about arrangements

that will be agreed or completed later to be satisfied that the licencing objectives

of public safety and the prevention of crime and disorder will properly be promoted. At

present, based on the matters I have outlined, Malcorp does not have that confidence. We

respectfully ask the subcommittee to consider whether it can reasonably have that confidence

Seat 1 - 2:41:57

either, and for that reason, we ask the application to be refused. Thank you.

Thank you very much. So if I may ask you to be brief and please don't repeat other statements

Seat 22 - 2:42:10

that have already been made and then we'll end the question session.

Thank you. I'm Don Oakley. I'm one of the 12 houses in Ashley, so I'm directly affected

as one of the other people who have spoken myself. In terms of facts, the borehole had

breakdown or was sorry unavailable to supply on the 7th and 9th of August that

goes in addition to the information I've given so there's actually five periods

this year. The concern last time on the June application was that at that point

the the applicant said that they would be very happy to have a condition and it

wasn't put in place by the committee and then they changed plans and did

something completely different from what they said they would do. So my concern is

that you don't actually comply with conditions at all, you must put the condition if we go

ahead because they won't comply. They've asked for clear and enforceable conditions,

and I think I really would like to state that. The impact of going ahead last time in June

meant one of my neighbours moved out and arranged to move out for the period that the festival

was going to be on. They had direct costs which are quantifiable and that they moved

out with what they felt were their vulnerable pets and animals.

Okay, so the individual moved out.

They arranged to be moved out at that time.

So it does impact people directly.

And I was also really disappointed

because I thought we had some very positive conversations.

I'm very disappointed to hear that actually it looks

as if the residents here and the businesses have sat back

and done nothing and expected them to come to us.

And that's not what was said.

What was said after the last hearing is you would engage, and that engagement just has not happened.

Okay? So people haven't just waited for it, they've been looking for how to engage.

And the festival was cancelled because of ticket sales. No other reason. Okay?

So the bit that was extremely frustrating to read on a website was when the committee put in place the restrictions for the festival.

The advertising on the website continued as 24 -hour music on your website, in fact.

Okay?

After the restrictions were put in place and the licence was made in June.

That's the organisation you're dealing with.

And I think very ably the team have delivered the objections that the residents would like to support.

Seat 1 - 2:44:49

So thank you.

Thank you very much, indeed.

At this point, I'm going to end the questioning.

Seat 1 - 2:45:00

I did say that I would like to say something.

Yeah, I allowed the objectors one hour.

We're now at one hour and 15 minutes.

The applicants had 25 minutes.

I think that's fair.

And again, I've got to appreciate everybody's time.

Seat 1 - 2:45:21

It's one very important thing that's not been discussed, which is the determination.

They are proposing strongly.

Seat 1 - 2:45:30

Excuse me, please don't disturb the proceedings.

That's correct.

Yeah, please, I ask you.

I understand there's a lot of emotion in the room.

I've heard it all afternoon, but we've got to come to a conclusion.

I think we've heard several times from objectors,

what their issues are. We've heard from the applicants.

I would just like to ask, first of all,

Seat 1 - 2:46:03

the members if they have any questions for the applicants or objectors.

Seat 8 - 2:46:07

Yes, I do.

I'm not quite certain where this footpath actually runs, whether it runs through the

festival site or on the border of the festival site or through a fenced off area. Could I

get some clarity on that? Do we have that in the pack?

Yes, it's in the pack.

Page 26.

Right.

We've got it. Thank you.

Page 26.

What page 25?

Yeah.

Seat 8 - 2:46:36

Thank you. So it runs across the festival site but not across any fenced off areas that

would be subject to ticket cheques?

Seat 29 - 2:46:48

It runs beneath the fenced off areas. So the entire site is fenced. So you are beneath

Seat 8 - 2:47:00

the camping yet above the car park, if that makes sense.

So you have to wander across the festival site to be able to utilise the footpath?

It's horizontal. The festival site is quite vertical in nature. The PROW is horizontal

crossing it.

Does it go through the arena or does it go through the...

It's south of the camping. Perhaps the visual will help you.

Seat 1 - 2:47:20

Thank you. I'd like to ask the applicants if they've got any more questions at this

point.

I have no questions, but if I may have a brief period to sum up.

Yes, of course. Please go ahead.

No questions. Thank you.

We'll come to that in a moment.

From objectors who have spoken, do you have any questions?

die.

Seat 22 - 2:47:58

Sorry about that.

It has been raised, I think the sound guy said that there were sound barriers in place.

is a very valid point that the proposed sound barriers are bales of straw.

Seat 1 - 2:48:17

Thank you.

Chair.

Seat 3 - 2:48:26

Could I, as a member, could my question be, please, can they respond to that?

Yes, I'm here.

Seat 24 - 2:49:12

Can you hear me? I've lost all sound. We can hear you, Chris. You can continue. I couldn't

hear anyone else. So straw bales are widely used by myself and at events throughout the

The straw bales are incredibly dense, so they're large Heston bales for anyone in the farming

community here.

They're extremely densely packed.

The best analogy, very quickly, I can give to that is they're not inherently flammable.

Hay, on the other hand, burns very, very easily in bales because it's very loosely packed

for food.

But the straw bales, they're two metres by one metre by one metre.

fire. They weigh between 600 and 700 kilogrammes, and it's very, very difficult to set these

straw bales on fire. The best analogy would be you can very easily burn a single piece

of paper, but it's very hard to set a telephone directory on fire, which for younger people

they won't even know what a telephone directory is. But straw bale walls have been discussed

in the noise management plan. There's a risk assessment for them. And the plans, the event

management plan and the noise management plan have all gone through not only the safety

advisory group process, but also all of the responsible authorities that deal with licencing

as the experts in their chosen fields. And none of them have caused a concern to those

responsible authorities, which includes the fire service. And it also includes the environmental

Health Sec Department. Fire is obviously a great concern in the country and I'm sorry

to hear that there had been a recent field fire. I have also heard that the fields are

stubble at the moment and the field where the festival is, if a straw bale wall should

be ignited which would require accelerant, you'd have to deliberately intend to set it

on fire for it to be set on fire.

There is sufficient firefighting equipment

and water available on site to put that

into a non -escalation scenario.

Straw bale walls I've been using for 12 years now

and I'm one of the leading experts

for the Institute of Acoustics

for their properties as acoustic barriers.

They are also kept away from public accessibility and there is also generally no smoking signs

but people aren't allowed to climb upon them, for example.

So there isn't an increased risk of fires starting from a straw bale wall.

The scenario that's happened this summer is that there's a heightened attention in terms

of the wildfires that have taken place which have been on the news for the past few months.

But it isn't envisaged that there's an additional risk of fire from them starting from that

packet of fuel which are very hard. They're not flammable in the same way that a hay bale

Seat 1 - 2:52:27

would be which is used for food. They're 600 to 700 kilogrammes each.

It might just be useful to add.

Seat 28 - 2:52:32

Yeah, I see your hand up but Naomi do you want to follow up?

No, thank you, sorry.

Seat 1 - 2:52:42

If I can just add Councillors as well that the bales themselves are treated with fire retardant treatment as well.

Thank you very much.

Dai, please.

I just wanted to make a point, sorry.

We don't hear you from the back.

I just wanted to, I'm a farming girl, so I just wanted to make the point that

straw does burn and also is notorious for what's known as internal combustion.

On my parents farm a barn of straw caught fire, it just overheats and it

burns. So I just want to make that point that straw does burn and it burns on its

without anybody putting anything near it.

Seat 22 - 2:53:29

So if you'd like to come forward, apologies. We'll all be fitter by the end of the day.

Councillors, I just wanted to clarify partly something that

the applicant's noise advisor has mentioned about the amount of water on site.

And I feel like we're going a bit round and round in circles

in terms of whether there's going to be enough water

on site or not.

And it sounds to me from what I've heard already,

there is only just enough water for showers, drinking water,

and toilets, given the fact that the applicant needs

to have a supply of bottled water in place.

And environmental health guidance apparently states

that you must, for firefighting,

water must be available at 2 ,000 litres a minute for three hours which equates to

360 ,000 litres of water. So I'm just trying to clarify from the applicant

what they have got on site and what they haven't. That was my first question.

A fire tender carries 10 ,000 litres of water and is generally sufficient to

Seat 22 - 2:54:39

deal with most fires.

In response to that comment, I understand that four fire engines attended a recent failed

fire in the vicinity of the event and had to then travel a mile and a half to top up

with water because they hadn't got enough.

Seat 3 - 2:54:58

I would just like to say that I do find that very interesting, but he is not a fire expert,

Seat 22 - 2:55:07

So perhaps that question. My question is purely is

can they satisfy themselves? There's enough water on site.

Seat 28 - 2:55:16

Yeah, my client has been backing forth on a number of occasions with the pollution control team at the council with regards to the water

supply.

What I would say is that the amount of water required on site has been specifically considered by the team.

There have been a couple of revisions in terms of water supply to the event and how this is to take place.

This isn't a case, for example, where the application hasn't been scrutinised by somebody who is specifically thinking about water supply.

It has been. Representation was submitted. It was considered.

There have been discussions back and forth with my client with regards to the level of water supply, and that representation has now been withdrawn.

The water team are content that there is sufficient supply both for drinking, washing and for

emergency supply.

Seat 22 - 2:56:08

Just in response, the pollution control team are not concerned with fire safety, they are

concerned with the quality of the water for consumption.

Seat 28 - 2:56:17

They are concerned with the water that will be needed on site and the amount that has

Seat 1 - 2:56:25

been agreed with the team. If I can ask the gentleman online to go on

mute, I think there might be some noise coming through. That seems to have worked. Please.

Seat 22 - 2:56:41

I have one further question, sir. There was talk about Harris fencing. I just want some

clarity is the proposal that the extent of Harris fencing is such that it will

certainly provide security to the boundary of Ashley Marsh farm most

Seat 29 - 2:57:02

certainly it borders our barrier with them completely the entire campsite I'll

say that again just for clarity there's Harris fencing around the entire live -in

camp live -in vehicle area there's Harris fencing around the entire campsite there

fencing around the entire festival arena where licenced activities will occur. The Harris

fencing has a number of break points where it can be split comfortably in case of the

need for an emergency departure and the emergency access lane circumvents the fencing entirely

in order to get to the top end of the arena where there to be an emergency in the north

most part of the arena. The fencing is absolutely there up against the eastern boundary where

Seat 23 - 2:57:43

Seat 22 - 2:57:46

share a boundary with Ashley Marsh. Sorry, I'm better graphically I'm afraid.

Are we saying because the event field is this area here so are you saying that

the fencing will go all the way around there but what about here? Well on that

boundary will there be Harris fencing down this boundary as well? I'm one of

those people that should wear glasses. I don't, so I need to get up close to you,

but I'm happy to sit down and show you. I don't know what page that one is, to be honest with you.

Seat 1 - 2:58:18

Can I ask just one at a time, please?

Seat 22 - 2:58:40

May I just approach the applicant for clarity?

it might just be quicker.

Seat 28 - 2:58:49

Is it this one?

Yeah.

So that's the advantage.

Not like this here.

Is that a boundary?

There we go.

That's the updating one there.

That's the fencing there.

So along the boundary.

Right.

And then down to, that's the festival area.

That's the licenced premises there.

And then that's the camping area

so you can see they're all fenced by one fence.

Right.

Does that go all the way down to there?

Sorry? So this is the gap here for the right way. We need to provide a pathway.

Right. That's a fence there but then there's a path in the middle because you need that for

emergency access. But I think for clarity Councillors the answer to the question is

Seat 1 - 2:59:31

that yes there will be continuous fencing around that entire boundary.

Thank you.

If you could speak through the chair please and if you've got a question.

Seat 1 - 2:59:50

Seat 29 - 2:59:57

The plan went through multiple revisions as is normal during the SAG process at which

point the fencing perimeters were revised on a couple of different

occasions. There has been fencing throughout to various different levels.

The final one has a single fence that encompasses both the camping and the

festival arena and then a separate set of fencing that encompasses the live -in

vehicle area. The only functional area of the site that we're not fencing off

is the main car park. I'm happy to show on a map it's the same map that was

submitted ahead of the final SAG meeting.

Seat 1 - 3:00:31

Okay, so the reports we've got, the graphics we've got in our documents,

Seat 1 - 3:00:41

fence, fence, fence are accurate. Thank you. Are there any more questions from,

Seat 22 - 3:00:48

have you got any more questions? Just clarifying that, sir. Just in

response to the question that you asked about horses, I've actually got a

Mr. Lundberg, if that helps.

So what he said is it will be extremely difficult

Seat 22 - 3:01:05

for him to relocate, particularly given the time.

Seat 22 - 3:01:07

Sorry.

It would be particularly difficult for him to relocate.

There's 11 horses of very high calibre

that would need to be found appropriate accommodation

and we're talking obviously just a few weeks now

before the event.

So he has got very great concerns

Seat 3 - 3:01:26

about having to relocate those horses.

Seat 22 - 3:01:31

So where are the horses now and can they just stay there a bit longer?

Seat 22 - 3:01:34

I know that's not an expense but...

I don't believe that they can but I can't take any further instructions

Seat 3 - 3:01:43

because I'm on this distance.

If you can hear me, sir, please answer the question.

Seat 1 - 3:01:49

I'm looking around the room if there are any more questions at this time before we go for

a wrap up from the applicants.

Seat 28 - 3:02:02

Please go ahead.

Thank you very much, Councillors.

I think I said it at the outset of my submissions, thank you for your time.

I appreciate it.

It's been a bit of a marathon.

I promise I won't keep you here for much longer.

I'm going to jump around a little bit, if I may.

Obviously I've been listening to the submissions made by those who've

objected so there may not be a clear line but I'm just going to jump

from point to point and just try and mop up a few things if I may. It was raised

at the outset that the application hasn't been submitted three months in

advance of the event date. I would highlight that the operative word in

that section of your policy is recommended. It's recommended that these

applications are submitted within that time frame but not required and as your

licencing officer detailed the policy, his guidance and its advisory in any case.

What I would say though is that albeit this is a fresh application, as I've said

you must consider on its own merits, this is the second application in relation to

an event. The initial application was submitted sometime before the

proposed June event and it has been known that the proposal, do you need that back?

Okay, it has been known that the proposal is for a September event for that period

of time. It was initially my client's intention to operate this event under the licence that

had previously been granted. That licence is still in existence, but there have been

some issues with transferring it, which is why we're before you today. So that just explains

why the timescales are slightly more truncated than my client certainly would have liked

them to be. Water has been discussed on a number of occasions.

as I said, this has been assessed by the water team at the water section of your

pollution control team. They are happy that it's sufficient. There's been a

number of references within the representations to other published

documents or googling of various things but the experts within your team

have assessed this point and as I said they didn't miss it or forget to engage.

They made representation and then had discussions with my client in order to

to get themselves into a position where they are comfortable to withdraw.

Fire safety has been touched on and has probably been the focus, I think, of the representations

that have been made.

And we absolutely understand why.

We understand why that is a concern.

It's topical.

It's a worry across the country.

And we understand why those concerns are there.

But what we would say is that my client has employed a professional team who have set

out safety plans for this event.

Within the event management plan consideration has been given to fire safety.

There is an external safety consultant appointed who will attend both prior to and during the

event to ensure that these measures are in place.

They will be there to assess the land as it lies on the date of this event and to advise

whether anything further is needed in terms of safety.

Whether the, I obviously can't comment as to whether the fire authority were present

at the safety advisory group meetings.

I'm quite happy to accept that they weren't.

But to suggest that they have not seen or scrutinised

the event management plan in advance of it being finalised

and signed off by the responsible authorities

is something that I suspect the fire authority

would take greater issue with than even my client does.

The ground where this activity,

where this event is proposed to take place,

as has been mentioned, is a stood field at the moment.

It is not an area though where this event to take place where you to decide to grant this licence

It is not a space where the ground is going to be left unsupervised at any time

There are going to be multiple attendees of the event staff security stewards patrolling the site at all times

This is not a situation where somebody likes a barbecue in a remote and unsupervised area with no management around them or

Something happens a spark while somebody is not while nobody is present at a venue

This is a highly regulated environment.

Staff, security, stewards, no doubt council officers coming to inspect to make sure that

everything is going off as it should be.

The professional safety team have assessed the risk.

They will be fully aware of the measures needed.

They will attend at the event and in advance of the event to ensure that appropriate measures

are in place.

So what I would say is that there is a significant difference in terms of the government advice

that's being given between a privately organised event or a privately organised meet -up of

friends with no risk assessment and an event with the specific scrutiny of safety measures

required. And this is evidenced, I would suggest, councillors, by the fact that multiple festival

events are proceeding across the country throughout the summer months, despite the prevailing

conditions, despite the government warning. There are festivals taking place throughout

August and September, as there are every year in this country. There's reference to a fire

that did occur on the land previously.

The fire was approximately,

Jason thinks about 10 metres in size at its absolute height.

It didn't spread at all.

Jason's got some photographs of it

if anybody would like to view that

in terms of sort of verifying what I've said there.

The event has full public liability cover

up to 10 million pounds.

That is entirely appropriate for this sort of event.

And I would submit respectfully that the limit of cover

isn't a matter that runs to one of the licencing objectives.

Here you guys are concerned with public safety,

quite rightly, but the limit of insurance cover doesn't necessarily fit into that.

We've talked about fencing. The campsite, the entertainment area is absolutely fenced all around.

As I think Daniel has said, there was an early version with no fencing around the campsite. This

has been changed. The entire event is fenced. There absolutely will not be people wandering

over neighbouring land. And I would go back to what I said in my submissions, that actually

people who've spent hundreds of pounds on a ticket to attend a music festival tend to want to

stay at it and enjoy it.

The toilet provision has again been approved in the event

management plan.

The calculations have been done in accordance

with the appropriate guides and codes of practise.

There's been concern about food provision.

People will be allowed to bring food with them,

albeit that they will not be allowed, of course,

the barbecues and so on and so forth.

There's been mention, huge amount of mention of concern

with regards to traffic.

Now a comprehensive traffic management plan

has been agreed with the highways team.

Jill Portlock at the highways team

has specifically confirmed that she's happy.

There was reference to concern around the postcode

and that's going to be dealt with by providing

two attendees, not postcodes, but actually coordinates,

what three words, pins, et cetera,

to ensure that people are coming the right way.

The team do not want people coming the way

that the postcode would direct them

and that is part of the traffic management plan.

With regards to traffic in any case, what I would do is say that a lot of the queries have been answered by that traffic management plan.

They've been answered by the fact that there will be a holding area for vehicles before the main car park.

But what I would also do, Councillors, is just gently nudge you towards, I think it's paragraph 3 .3 of your report.

I'm just going to cheque that that's correct.

3 .3 of your report, which contains the views

of the licencing authority.

It says the concerns raised,

which we do not consider irrelevant in the objections,

are matters to do with traffic, including road safety.

So I'll just gently point you towards that

in terms of the weight you give concerns around traffic.

That's not me attempting to say that traffic isn't an issue,

isn't something that should be addressed.

It is being done by the traffic management plan,

but your report suggests that it's not an issue

for you to consider today. That report also says the same with regards to

considerations in terms of wildlife. In terms of deliveries, my client does

absolutely acknowledge that it needs to liaise with Melcourt in terms of

deliveries taking place to the site should you decide to grant this licence.

But that is the key point that I would emphasise here Councillors is that the

last details of this, the practical details in terms of when things are

to take place cannot be finalised unless and until you determine that you're going to grant

this application. Otherwise, of course, the event will not be proceeding. But my client will

absolutely liaise with residents and businesses with regards to arrangements and access, we will

say, to all businesses in the area will be maintained. With regards to noise levels,

there's been much mention of fridges. There's been mention of, you know, sort of, I've had a quick

look at this or I'm concerned about what this means etc etc but you've heard

expert evidence from Chris I would personally submit that his credentials

are very impressive that his answers were comprehensive he is an expert in

these in this field it was mentioned that base levels and low frequency noise

has not been addressed but answers to those questions were specifically given

by Chris in the questions that you put to him the point to make is that the

noise levels of 43 decibels, that's at later hours,

are to be maintained at the nearest residential property.

That will be a condition of the licence

should you decide to grant it.

And that is something that my client is well aware of

and that they will have to abide by.

As the properties get further away,

naturally the noise levels will drop.

But as I say, hopefully you will agree,

I certainly felt that Chris was extremely knowledgeable

and compelling and that a significant time

has been put into considering noise propagation

and how noise can be managed at this event.

Again, I would flag that your pollution team,

your experts with regards to noise management

agree with this, and I would respectfully

invite you to do the same.

I think that the offer of a hotline number

whilst it had been suggested that this shouldn't be needed

is an important safeguard, and again,

my client's very happy to condition the addition of that.

There's reference to sort of quotes that my client has made

in the public realm, if you like, a Reddit quote and a reference to the event 100 %

proceeding in September. I think I understand the concerns that have been

raised there but I think with respect this is clearly targeted at proposed

attendees. There is always going to be a difference between the persona that's

presented to attendees who are proposing to attend a festival because they want

to hear the music. Frankly attendees are not going to be interested in hearing

about the fact that speakers are directional and we've got this much

sound attenuation and so on and so forth, they want to hear about the event.

So I would suggest that that comment should be given little weight in terms of my client's

position on compliance.

In terms of the event proceeding in September or the comment that the event will be proceeding

in September, please be assured, Councillors, my client does not presume to predict what

your decision will be today.

They absolutely know that this is in your hands, but they need to, as a business, operate

and proceed from a position of optimism.

and they very much hope that you will grant this licence today,

but if you don't, they will have to make appropriate arrangements around that.

And indeed, I would say, Cancers, it's been raised on a number of occasions

that the fact that the event didn't proceed in June

demonstrates my client's lack of responsibility.

I would suggest the opposite.

A less responsible operator looking at the arrangements

that they needed to put in place for an event

and seeing that they were going to come up lacking

because they didn't have the time

to complete everything that needed to be done,

would have said, well, we've got to get this done anyway,

because we've sold this many tickets.

My client has not done that.

They've postponed the event because they know

that they need to have all of these safety measures

in place before they proceed with it.

It would be my submission to conclude Councillors

that Daniel and the team have answered every question

that's been posed by you or by the objectors

comprehensively and I take issue with the suggestion that this is a plan that's

been cobbled together. Daniel knows this operation inside out, he knows what

measures need to be implemented, he's got the right team in place, he's employed at

very great expense, a very experienced and in my view compelling acoustic

consultant. He's asking for you to replicate almost exactly a licence

granted by your colleagues in May based on the same set of circumstances but

with the water issue resolved comprehensively and with this licence

restricted to one event only with any further event needing to be the subject

to further application.

There's been much conversation about the propriety

of this location for such an event.

I would submit councillors, many festivals,

if not most, do take place in open, rural, outdoor areas,

because those areas can necessarily be curated

into a festival space.

They are not, we would agree,

appropriate for regular events, but they are,

and this is, we would submit, appropriate

for an event taking place on one occasion a year.

There has been talk about public transport and infrastructure around the event.

The infrastructure is within the event itself.

It's not an event that people will come in and out of.

It's an event that they are going to come to and stay at.

They have paid to be at an event, to camp for a weekend, and that is where they are

going to stay.

Finally, I'll end perhaps where I started with a reminder that your responsible authorities

are content that this application be granted.

They do not appear in front of you today.

Their representations, if they were made, have been withdrawn.

The police, the pollution team, the fire authority

do not object to this application.

And I'll repeat what I said at the start,

that they are your experts and that I

would submit that their views should

be given significant weight.

Thank you so very much for your patience.

Thank you.

Seat 1 - 3:15:30

Thank you very much.

At this point, the committee will leave the room, will retire to consider, will make that

decision known today. I'm sorry for those who long drives back up to Cheshire, but we

will make that decision known today and we'll come back to the chamber to announce that

decision. I just want to make sure that everybody feels they have been able to say what they

needed to say today.

Seat 1 - 3:16:17

If the objectors can agree on a spokesperson.

Seat 1 - 3:16:37

Seat 22 - 3:16:40

Thank you. Thank you, Dai. Please go ahead.

I guess I would just like to reiterate the conversations that we've had previously, that

the comment that was just made, the previous one was delayed because they weren't ready,

isn't actually technically correct. We know that that was due to an issue with legal issue

over licencing as declared on their social media and Facebook pages. So that is actually

technically not correct.

We also know as a fact that they have

said that they will communicate with us and they haven't.

We also know as a fact that they have put this information out

on social media.

I'm sorry, but I don't agree that, oh, well, it's

OK to put, we are 100 % confirmed out

because that sells tickets.

That's actually disingenuous in my book.

If you want to go to it, it's actually a blatant lie,

but I'll go with disingenuous.

The comments that were made on Reddit are also somewhat concerning because I don't know

that that shows any due diligence in my book.

I am very concerned about the straw bales being used to sound barriers.

Saying they don't catch fire, I find a little unusual having been brought up on a farm and

know exactly how much things catch fire and how quickly they can catch fire.

There have been a number of conversations about road safety.

I'm not going to go into them again, but it is very clear that the road network does not work with that number of vehicles

We keep changing from visit 300 6 600 if it's 600 vehicles

And they're all eating between 10 in the morning and 4 o 'clock which apparently is the time they have to be kicked out on Monday

That's a lot of vehicles on our

and

There are issues obviously with the neighbour with the horses that need to be brought into account and the conversations being asked

can they move them? I would point out why should they? It is their house, their property,

why should they have to move their horses because festivals decided to rock up next

door? That feels a bit of an infringement on public, on your own personal safety. We

have said it a number of times, competence. Do you believe that all the things they have

said they are going to do this time, they are going to do, because we have evidence

that says they didn't the last time. So you have to use your own conscience, you have

to use your own thought process to say as an elected representative of your community,

like I'm an elected representative of mine, can I believe what I've been told?

Seat 1 - 3:19:13

I'll leave it at that.

Thank you very much indeed.

Just as a reminder, before we go, we're going to be deciding or making a decision based

on the principles of licencing, which is a prevention of crime and disorder, public safety,

the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm.

We'll be working from the Licencing Act of 2003 so we will be doing things

legally and the decision will come to we will ground and bring that back to you.

Seat 28 - 3:20:00

Chair, if I may, sorry, if I may, might it be possible for you to perhaps set a minimum

time that you're going to be deliberating? It might be nice to be able to pop out, get

a bit of fresh air and I don't want to disappear for too long.

Seat 1 - 3:20:13

A minimum time, I think we need at least half an hour. We've got to write a conclusion as

Seat 28 - 3:20:28

well. We'll have a good discussion. It might be longer, I'm afraid, but minimum

half an hour.

Seat 1 - 3:20:34

Earliest will be back at 6 .10. Thank you very much indeed.

Seat 1 - 3:21:07

Thank you very much for your patience.

We took a bit longer than the 30 minutes, but it was, we had a lot to think about.

We've heard a lot of representation from the applicants and also from members of the public and objectors

The panel has come to a decision and what I would like to do is read that decision out now

We have

discuss the issue and based on the four licencing objectives, the prevention of crime, public

safety, prevention of public nuisance and protection of children, along with the Licencing

Act of 2003 and the guidance from the latest government guidance, we have looked at the

reports, we've looked at the consultees' comments. We found two consultee comments

in the original report from Environmental Health regarding noise and from our Environmental

Officers regarding water. Those consultees are now happy in regards of the noise management

plan and the way that we're handling the water with tankers. Apart from that we

didn't have any consultee input at all. We do understand that the fire brigade

were not present at the SAG meeting and I'll come to that a little bit later. We

We also heard concerns about noise, traffic, lack of consultation, fire and many other concerns.

However, on balance and based on the Licencing Act of 2003, the panel has agreed to grant with conditions.

conditions. These conditions include the already agreed condition on the NMP, that is the noise

management plan will be in place, that there will be a fire inspection from a competent

authority before the event starts, that the Ashley Farm borehole will not be used in any

respect. We would like signage if not already included in the EMP, which we've

not seen, which would include no fireworks or pyrotechnics, no fires or

barbecues, disperse of smoking devices safely. We are as a panel restricting to

to one event only in September of 2020.

2026.

2026, excuse me.

Back in time.

We would also encourage the applicants

to work as closely as you can with local residents

and businesses, specifically on the traffic plan.

That was also a cause of concern.

Now, finally, I would like to say that this is a panel decision and all parties have a

right of appeal. You can follow this up with your legal advisors. If you would do so, the

event is only a few days away.

Within 21 days.

Yeah, I think within 21 days is the legal limit. With that, I declare the meeting ended.

Thank you.

Please provide any feedback/comments relating to the live webcast here. Any feedback submitted will be received to the Democratic Services team.

Required field

Name

Comments

Need an accessible hCaptcha?
Check available options.
Sign up to hCaptcha or Log in to hCaptcha.

By clicking Send feedback, you agree that Cotswold District Council and Public-i can use the information above to review your feedback and contact you about it. See our Privacy Policy for more details.

Interactive webcast player

Licensing Sub-Committee (Licensing Act 2003 Matters)Wednesday, 19th August 2026 at 2:00pm

Seat 1 - 0:00:14

Seat 3 - 0:03:23

Seat 1 - 0:03:29

Seat 8 - 0:03:36

Seat 9 - 0:03:41

Seat 1 - 0:03:46

Seat 23 - 0:03:49

Seat 24 - 0:03:54

Seat 25 - 0:03:59

Seat 2 - 0:04:05

Seat 1 - 0:04:12

Seat 24 - 0:04:58

Seat 1 - 0:07:50

Seat 1 - 0:08:48

Seat 28 - 0:09:22

Seat 1 - 0:37:40

Seat 8 - 0:38:26

Seat 29 - 0:39:04

Seat 8 - 0:39:35

Seat 29 - 0:39:43

Seat 8 - 0:39:47

Seat 29 - 0:39:59

Seat 8 - 0:40:09

Seat 8 - 0:40:49

Seat 8 - 0:40:53

Seat 8 - 0:42:01

Seat 8 - 0:43:10

Seat 8 - 0:45:28

Seat 8 - 0:46:37

Seat 8 - 0:50:15

Seat 8 - 0:54:24

Seat 28 - 0:55:25

Seat 8 - 0:55:32

Seat 8 - 0:55:44

Seat 28 - 0:55:52

Seat 8 - 0:57:21

Seat 8 - 1:00:22

Seat 8 - 1:00:43

Seat 8 - 1:00:58

Seat 8 - 1:04:36

Seat 30 - 1:04:58

Seat 8 - 1:05:14

Seat 29 - 1:05:19

Seat 1 - 1:05:38

Seat 3 - 1:05:41

Seat 29 - 1:07:37

Seat 29 - 1:11:30

Seat 1 - 1:12:58

Seat 29 - 1:13:16

Seat 1 - 1:13:21

Seat 29 - 1:14:07

Seat 3 - 1:15:50

Seat 29 - 1:15:56

Seat 1 - 1:16:12

Seat 1 - 1:16:22

Seat 9 - 1:16:25

Seat 29 - 1:16:47

Seat 28 - 1:17:16

Seat 9 - 1:17:32

Seat 29 - 1:17:39

Seat 9 - 1:18:10

Seat 29 - 1:18:19

Seat 8 - 1:18:59

Seat 29 - 1:19:16

Seat 8 - 1:20:02

Seat 29 - 1:20:10

Seat 8 - 1:20:42

Seat 1 - 1:20:50

Seat 1 - 1:21:34

Seat 1 - 1:21:43

Seat 1 - 1:22:18

Seat 24 - 1:22:26

Seat 1 - 1:22:34

Seat 1 - 1:23:01

Seat 1 - 1:23:14

Seat 1 - 1:23:23

Seat 22 - 1:23:24

Seat 3 - 1:23:26

Licensing Sub-Committee (Licensing Act 2003 Matters)
Wednesday, 19th August 2026 at 2:00pm